Hi Sven,

On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 9:00 PM, scl wrote:

Hi,

yesterday I came across http://www.gimp.org/develop/ and clicked the link 'INSTALL'. It refers to https://git.gnome.org/browse/gimp/plain/INSTALL, which doesn't exist anymore in this form. This raised a question: can the link checker also detect dead links that don't result in an HTTP error but in simply nothing or unreadable garbage?

Well in this case, the URL you gave is actually a 404 error even though it does not show in the browser (at least in my Firefox, it shows as just a blank page). You can see it is a 404 by doing a wget for instance.
Thus in the report generated with the program linkchecker, this URL was listed. In this specific case though, it would actually have listed it as a warning for being 0 byte even if there had been no error.

I'll attach the list of errors and warnings I generated a few days ago (only Sven will get it, since the list will get rid of the attachment, as usual).
That's quite some work to be done for someone with a little time, and a few grep or sed commands. :-)

Jehan

Kind regards,

Sven

_______________________________________________ gimp-developer-list mailing list
List address: gimp-developer-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list

On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 5:00 AM, scl wrote:

Hi,

yesterday I came across http://www.gimp.org/develop/ and clicked the link 'INSTALL'. It refers to https://git.gnome.org/browse/gimp/plain/INSTALL, which doesn't exist anymore in this form. This raised a question: can the link checker also detect dead links that don't result in an HTTP error but in simply nothing or unreadable garbage?

Kind regards,

Sven

Hi Sven,
If you're inquiring about my link tester then yes it should get it. The [get_link_status function][1] is what does the actual checking. It does a combination of HTTP HEAD method (so it only grabs the headers instead of content) as well has a bit of exception handling for other non-HTTP unexpected responses. If it can be improved I'm all ears for improving it. Also, I'm using python code only in a [main method][2] which means one could write another script which will import frontend_test.py and take advantage of that function (using it like a library instead of an executable).

Also, as Jehan pointed out that [INSTALL file][3] returns HTTP 404 not found. So a link checker should catch that.

SAM

[1]: https://github.com/sag47/chewbotkah/blob/development/frontend_test.py#L38-L83 [2]:
https://github.com/sag47/chewbotkah/blob/development/frontend_test.py#L252 [3]: https://git.gnome.org/browse/gimp/plain/INSTALL

I CC all the MAINTAINERS.

For those maintainers who may not be following. I'm in the process of creating a decent build and QA process for the GIMP website.

I just realized that the install.sh is no good for Jenkins. It's not a POSIX compatible script which Jenkins requires in order to properly report the build status. Attached I have a patch of install.sh and the original install.sh.

The patch is based off of master 22561ef. I have also attached a standalone install.sh.

I added lots of comments and environment information because a good bash script needs environment information in my humble opinion in the off chance it doesn't work years down the road you can at least know what environment it was originally written.

SAM

On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Sam Gleske wrote:

I CC all the MAINTAINERS.

For those maintainers who may not be following. I'm in the process of creating a decent build and QA process for the GIMP website.

I just realized that the install.sh is no good for Jenkins. It's not a POSIX compatible script which Jenkins requires in order to properly report the build status. Attached I have a patch of install.sh and the original install.sh.

The patch is based off of master 22561ef. I have also attached a standalone install.sh.

I added lots of comments and environment information because a good bash script needs environment information in my humble opinion in the off chance it doesn't work years down the road you can at least know what environment it was originally written.

SAM

I opened a bugzilla report instead.

https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=729421

I'll do that from now on.

SAM

Hi,

On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 6:43 AM, Sam Gleske wrote:

On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Sam Gleske wrote:

I CC all the MAINTAINERS.

For those maintainers who may not be following. I'm in the process of creating a decent build and QA process for the GIMP website.

I just realized that the install.sh is no good for Jenkins. It's not a POSIX compatible script which Jenkins requires in order to properly report the build status. Attached I have a patch of install.sh and the original install.sh.

The patch is based off of master 22561ef. I have also attached a standalone install.sh.

I added lots of comments and environment information because a good bash script needs environment information in my humble opinion in the off chance it doesn't work years down the road you can at least know what environment it was originally written.

SAM

I opened a bugzilla report instead.

https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=729421

That's probably the best indeed for not lose track, and also for uploading files. :-)
Thanks for all the work!

Jehan

I'll do that from now on.

SAM