Launchpad itself

+editstatus should not accept binary package as source package

Bug #37866 reported by Sebastien Bacher
8
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
Launchpad itself
Fix Released
Critical
Christian Reis

Bug Description

In the +editstatus page, entering a binary package in the source package field should generate a error message.

Steps to reproduce:
1. In any open bug reported on Ubuntu, go to the +editstatus page;
2. Put a binary package (e.g. gstreamer0.10-plugins-good) as source package;
2. Click on Save changes;
3. You're redirected to https://staging.ubuntu.com/distros/ubuntu/+source/gstreamer0.10-plugins-good/+bug/$bugnumber

That's confusing, the page is set to a "wrong context" then (the actions of the right column are relative to the package name).

See original description
Tags: lp-bugs
Revision history for this message
Christian Reis (kiko) wrote :

Can you try and confirm, Matsubara? Essentially, Sebastian is saying that the source package name field in +editstatus accepted a binary package name.

Changed in malone:
assignee: nobody → matsubara
Diogo Matsubara (matsubara)
description: updated
Changed in malone:
status: Unconfirmed → Confirmed
Revision history for this message
Scott James Remnant (Canonical) (canonical-scott) wrote :

This is a critical bug, it is causing reports to get lost because the bug status subscribers for the source package DO NOT GET THEM!

Revision history for this message
Christian Reis (kiko) wrote :

Okay, to be clear, this is /not/ a Malone bug. The problem here is that we have a host of strings that are actually binary package names but are in the SourcePackageName table. I believe this is caused by a bug in the archivepublisher; we've been looking at it but it's not very easy to figure out what's going on. Will keep you posted. At any rate, the bug is not as terrible as it seems.

Revision history for this message
Christian Reis (test account) (kiko-bichodomato) wrote :

Found it. It's in the priority handling code of verify_uploaded_files in nascentupload.py. It's very confused code and I am actually not sure what the right way to fix it is; I'll need to check with Daniel to be sure.

Diogo Matsubara (matsubara)
Changed in malone:
assignee: matsubara → kiko
Revision history for this message
Christian Reis (kiko) wrote :

Landed in PQM, needs rolling out and then cleaning up of data.

Changed in malone:
status: Confirmed → Fix Committed
Revision history for this message
John Leach (johnleach) wrote :

I reported a kernel bug (#44412) a few weeks ago on the package linux-image-2.6.15-23-686. I've only just discovered this isn't the right place to do this, and moved it to kernel-source-2.6.15. I'm assuming this fix prevents people making this mistake in future.

There are a few other bugs reported on this binary package (and likely others) which should probably be moved over as part of the clean up.

Revision history for this message
Christian Reis (kiko) wrote :

Bug 54710 is where we're tracking the database cleanup side of this.

Changed in malone:
status: Fix Committed → Fix Released
To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  
Everyone can see this information.
Subscribing...

Other bug subscribers

Remote bug watches

Bug watches keep track of this bug in other bug trackers.