lintian.ubuntuwire.org

[Evan Broder]

On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 7:01 PM, Evan Broder <evan at ebroder.net> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 5:24 PM, Colin Watson <cjwatson at ubuntu.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 04:04:35PM -0800, Evan Broder wrote:
>>> On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Benjamin Drung <bdrung at ubuntu.com> wrote:
>>> > non-standard-file-perm wants files with perm 0644 instead of 0664. Is
>>> > this a bug in our build farm?
>>>
>>> I remember there was a point during the last development cycle where
>>> the umask on the buildds was incorrect. Could this be fallout from
>>> that? It seems to be fairly prevalent in our builds:
>>
>> Yes, there was one such incident due to a broken sudo deployment.  We
>> squashed it fairly quickly, but there were some builds in the meantime.
>> I think we checked to make sure that those were all root:root so not too
>> important, but I'd have to check back through IRC logs and the like to
>> make sure.
>>
>> Can you check for more details?  I'd like to know if any of these are
>> current, as if so then we still have a buildd problem which we need to
>> fix ASAP.  I'd also like to know if there are any files with ownership
>> other than root:root in this set.  If you can't get that information
>> easily, then the full list of affected files and packages would be a
>> good start.
>
> On a second look, I don't actually think this is connected to that
> incident. Benjamin's example package, audacity, was last built 4 weeks
> ago.
>
> I've collected all packages/files triggering the warning; it's at
> http://web.mit.edu/broder/Public/non-standard-file-perm
>

And this should be information on the packages with problems and when
they were uploaded:

http://paste.ubuntu.com/736896/

With the exception of the brother-lpr-drivers-* packages (which look
like they could potentially be uncorrected fallout from the sudo
issue), they are all uploads that have happened since precise opened.