On Thu, 2019-03-14 at 11:49 -0400, Chris Lamb wrote: > Package: lintian > Version: 2.9.1~bpo9+1 > Severity: normal > X-Debbugs-CC: ans...@debian.org, b...@decadent.org.uk, > ftpmas...@ftp-master.debian.org> > > Ansgar wrote: > > > Ben Hutchings writes: > > > On Wed, 2019-03-13 at 12:07 +0000, Debian FTP Masters wrote: > > > > linux source: lintian output: 'license-problem-gfdl-invariants > > > > Documentation/media/uapi/fdl-appendix.rst invariant part is: > > > > published by the free software .. foundation, with no invariant > > > > sections, no front-cover texts .. and no back-cover texts', > > > > automatically rejected package. > > > > linux source: If you have a good reason, you may override this lintian > > > > tag. > > > > > > We keep getting false positives for this, because lintian doesn't > > > recognise the "no invariant sections" part with markup. This should > > > not be an auto-reject. > > > > I've removed it from the list of auto-rejects for now. Also CC'ed > > the lintian maintainers to make them aware of the problem (if they > > aren't already). > > > > Ansgar > > > >  > > https://salsa.debian.org/ftp-team/dak/commit/44fe84b9e24c59ac932f303cd25f1df3b8a20e82 > > (We were not aware.) Filing bug so this doesn't get lost…
I don't think it is practicable for lintian to recognise arbitrary markup within the sentence, which is why I previously overrode the warning for other files rather than opening a bug. So my complaint was not that lintian warned at all, but that this was treated as being a sufficiently reliable check as to trigger an auto-reject. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings Make three consecutive correct guesses and you will be considered an expert.
Description: This is a digitally signed message part