Skip to content

Conversation

@tsteenbe
Copy link

@tsteenbe tsteenbe commented Sep 22, 2025

See individual commits for details.

@tsteenbe
Copy link
Author

This PR is currently blocked due to #1885.

@tsteenbe tsteenbe force-pushed the sca-integration-ort-to-scancode-io branch 2 times, most recently from d90305a to 218fc4f Compare September 22, 2025 13:54
@tsteenbe tsteenbe force-pushed the sca-integration-ort-to-scancode-io branch from 218fc4f to 345155d Compare October 1, 2025 07:56
Signed-off-by: Thomas Steenbergen <thomas@aboutcode.org>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Steenbergen <thomas@aboutcode.org>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Steenbergen <thomas@aboutcode.org>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Steenbergen <thomas@aboutcode.org>
@tsteenbe tsteenbe force-pushed the sca-integration-ort-to-scancode-io branch 4 times, most recently from ba94ab2 to 1cd5ce0 Compare November 19, 2025 10:38
Resolves #1727 #1884.

Signed-off-by: Thomas Steenbergen <thomas@aboutcode.org>
@tsteenbe tsteenbe force-pushed the sca-integration-ort-to-scancode-io branch from 1cd5ce0 to 2452675 Compare November 19, 2025 10:40
@tsteenbe tsteenbe marked this pull request as ready for review November 19, 2025 10:41
@tsteenbe
Copy link
Author

@tdruez Could you help me debug this PR, have been running into issues with ScanCode.io detecting the right number of packages, vulnerabilities and dependencies?

@tsteenbe tsteenbe requested a review from tdruez November 19, 2025 10:42
plus a few adjustments.

Signed-off-by: tdruez <tdruez@aboutcode.org>
Signed-off-by: tdruez <tdruez@aboutcode.org>
Not vulnerability data in SPDX output

Signed-off-by: tdruez <tdruez@aboutcode.org>
Signed-off-by: tdruez <tdruez@aboutcode.org>
@tdruez
Copy link
Contributor

tdruez commented Nov 20, 2025

Hey @tsteenbe, sure I can help!

Changes:

  • Set 0 expected packages for the "result-without-findings" SBOM afcd93c
  • Set 0 expected vulnerability for the "SPDX YAML SBOM", no vulnerability data in SPDX output 946648f
  • Enable the XML SBOM job, now properly supported edc8ca6

Now there are a couple FIXME left to discuss:

  1. https://github.com/aboutcode-org/scancode.io/pull/1886/files#diff-a1d9a02b6d47c297535484fe73ff6436f3ba38f7b3de938b41aa3b43bde7158bR210

This is a data issue. ScanCode.io loads what is provided in the SBOM, see https://github.com/oss-review-toolkit/ort/blob/e40ada3cda7ff156607e88499540e82741b3aaee/plugins/reporters/cyclonedx/src/funTest/resources/cyclonedx-reporter-expected-result.json#L365-L386

Nothing to fix here imo.

  1. https://github.com/aboutcode-org/scancode.io/pull/1886/files#diff-a1d9a02b6d47c297535484fe73ff6436f3ba38f7b3de938b41aa3b43bde7158bR341-R346
    Both values look correct in the ScanCode.io imported results. The SBOM has 380 components and the full dependencies tree looks correct too.

Let me know about the expected values.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants