retitle 468804 [checks/files] detect *.pm files in /usr/lib
severity 468804 wishlist
clone 468804 -1
retitle -1 [checks/files] warn of arch-dependent package all in /usr/share
severity -1 wishlist
thanks

Roberto C. Sánchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> It appears that lintian misses some important problems.  In the process
> of preparing to sponsor a package for someone, I came across some
> oddities and asked about them in #debian-devel.  The discussion revealed
> more problems than I initially realized.  I have copied the exchange
> below, but the summary is:
> 
>  - files in /usr/bin with man pages in man/man8 (the binaries should be
>    either in /usr/sbin or the man pages in man/man1)
>  - the package scatters perl modules about /usr/lib (which really ought
>    to be in /usr/share/perl5)
>  - the package declares itself arch any, but really is arch all.

Hi Roberto,

In the future, please don't submit bug reports like this that combine
multiple problems into a single bug report.  Each separate issue should be
a separate bug report, since otherwise the maintainer has to clone the bug
and retitle it if one bug is fixed and not the other.

The first problem that you report is already an open lintian bug
(#348864).  Please see that bug report for information about why this is
harder than it sounds.  I think that bug report did arrive at a possible
solution for a more limited check, but as yet no one has had time to write
the check.

The third problem is a consequence of the second problem.  lintian has no
way of knowing that those files in /usr/lib aren't arch-dependent.  If
they were all in /usr/share (and with no files in /usr/bin; again, lintian
can't know if the Perl scripts contain arch-dependent constants or other
code), lintian could warn.  I'll clone another bug report for that.

The severity of all of these requests is wishlist.  lintian doesn't claim
to catch everything that's wrong with a package.  Bug severities higher
than wishlist are for errors in lintian or program malfunctions, not for
things that it misses.

Thanks for keeping this in mind in the future!

-- 
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED])               <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>


Reply via email to