W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qa-dev@w3.org > February 2003

Re: [check] 0.6.2 release (Was Re: inaccuracies in validator)

From: Frederic Schutz <schutz@mathgen.ch>
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 21:46:36 +1100
To: Terje Bless <link@pobox.com>
Cc: QA Dev <public-qa-dev@w3.org>, Ville Skyttä <ville.skytta@iki.fi>
Message-ID: <tlrj5vcmpq7713p30abakqt7mv871v07u1@4ax.com>

Le Fri, 21 Feb 2003 15:36:14 +0100, tu as ecrit :

>PS. Frederic, I haven't heard from you in a while; ping the list with
>current status of Debian packages if you have the time?

Yes. The package is doing fine, it's been included in debian "unstable" in
January. No big problem discovered so far, the only real problem that I
have is the opensp bug that hit me a few months ago, and that has been
reproduced by a few people using Debian (but not by Terje on several
machines -- of http://bugs.debian.org/170795 for more information).
Otherwise, it's still available from my home page, for Debian woody/stable
or testing. The woody version requires a few packages to be backported (3
at the moment, 4 very soon) -- what was the decision about storing the
RPM/DEBs and their dependencies on v.w.o ? 

>That leaves just links to your main repositories for RPMs and Debs and some
>explanations for users of same. Could you (Ville, Frederic) send me
>"patches" for whatever you need to make the binary dists work to your
>satisfaction?

I'll have to do a diff again to make sure that I don't forget anything (I
haven't really looked at the validator since mid-January), but I remember 2
things. First, I added a note on the "source" page saying that if you are
on a Debian system, you can see the source by doing bla bla and bla.

The second thing is about the SGML lib. At the moment, you can configure
the script to tell it where the SGML library is -- and the name of the
catalog(s) files is then hardcoded (and they are supposed to be in the same
directory). This doesn't work very well if the system provides a
centralised catalog ! At the moment, I have just adapted sgml.soc and
xml.soc so that they reference the Debian DTDs and I added a new
configuration option (SGML Catalog if I remember well) so that I can store
these in a different dictionary. In the near future, I would like to use
Debian's centralised SGML and (future) XML catalogs, and get rid of
sgml.soc and xml.soc entirely -- this would require more changes to the
configuration file.

To make a long story short, I made only ad-hoc changes to the script, and
there is nothing really that (sh|c)ould be directly integrated into the
original source -- but it would be nice to have a more customizable way to
specify which catalog/sgml lib to use. Any idea ?

Oh, and of course, there is the Debian sub-directory, which contains all
packaging information, but it is usually not recommended to add it to the
original source -- the main reason being that the Debian developer, in
general, will not have CVS write access to the original source and he
doesn't want an outdated debian/ directory to overwrite his newer local
version when he updates to a new release.

And last thing, a small suggestion that I remember writing in my TODO file
(on another machine), I don't think it's been added in the CVS version yet:
turning on the "debug" option should automatically turn on the "verbose"
option as well, or you won't see any debugging information.

Frédéric
Received on Monday, 24 February 2003 05:46:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 19 August 2010 18:12:43 GMT