[Lsb-infrastructure] Navigator not forming some paths right

Denis Silakov silakov at ispras.ru
Thu Sep 25 07:29:57 PDT 2008

Wichmann, Mats D wrote:
> Wichmann, Mats D wrote:
>> If you browse to interface gtk_toolbar_get_tips,
>> its clear that the LSB Versions situation is correct now.
>> However, if you hover over the link for the Main Description
>> for the 4.0-now entry, you see:
>> http://refspecs.linux-foundation.org/LSB_3.2.0/GtkToolbar.html#id3311203
>> This is incorrect on several levels:
>> - it doesn't make sense to point to a 3.2 spec for something
>>   that only began with 4.0
>> - of course 4.0 is not yet in refspecs so not sure how we
>>   would handle that
>> - the path is incomplete, as it certainly should contain
>>   LSB-Desktop-generic/LSB-Desktop-generic
>> - we don't have a GtkToolbar page at all; the specific page for
>>   this interface has not been committed to lsbspec or booksets yet
>> This situation makes me realize that we actually have a bit of
>> an issue with the representation of the LSB spec itself.  We
>> have now versioned the other specs, but LSB is always just "LSB"
>> and refers to all versions.  For a version-ranged reference,
>> I guess we'd need to figure out how to refer to the earliest
>> version that contains this information?  But then, what about
>> spec sections that have received corrections in subsequent
>> LSB releases?
> Sent a little too early, sorry.
> The main question was: is this mainly just a data problem?
> I can imagine that if I added these entries - which I think I
> did - that I was careless in copying something else and got
> the URL badly wrong. 

Yes, the final url is formed using two fields, Standard.Sbaselink and 
IntStd.ISurl. So we should also update ISurl field in the new IntStd 
record for gtk_toolbar_get_tips.

As you have already mentioned, the trick with LSB is that it has only 
one entry in the Standard table, while actually we have a set of 
standards. Sometime ago we solved the same problem with different LSB 
architectures - for LSB symbols whose description is arch-specific, 
Navigator provides several links - one for every architecture. Our 
suggestion is to teach Navigator to do the same thing for LSB versions, 
i.e. to give several urls for every LSB interface - one per every LSB 
version it was included in. We'll implement this in next Navigator update.

>  Assuming this may have happened elsewhere,
> how do we validate and correct the URLs?

Good question. I'd suggest to create a script which will use wget or 
simply send some requests to ensure that the page is in place. Though 
for many cases it is not enough; for example, for some documents (like 
Gtk spec) it would be useful to check if they contain anchors that we 
use in our urls. We'll investigate this problem; we are currently 
working on script which will perform some db consistency checks, and it 
would be useful to add urls validation there. Then, I guess, we can add 
it to autobuilders to check the master db periodically.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.linux-foundation.org/pipermail/lsb-infrastructure/attachments/20080925/134a9b53/attachment.htm 

More information about the lsb-infrastructure mailing list