On Thu, Feb 08, 2024 at 06:39:18PM +0000, Bastien Roucariès wrote: > Le jeudi 8 février 2024, 18:31:28 UTC Santiago Ruano Rincón a écrit : > > On Sat, 14 Oct 2023 20:23:18 +0200 Bill Allombert <ballo...@debian.org> > > wrote: > > > On Sun, Sep 18, 2022 at 12:14:07AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote: > > > > Package: lintian > > > > Version: 2.115.3 > > > > Severity: normal > > > > > > > > Lintian issues these errors for putty 0.77-1: > > > > > > > > E: putty source: source-is-missing [doc/html/AppendixA.html] > > > > E: putty source: source-is-missing [doc/html/AppendixB.html] > > > > E: putty source: source-is-missing [doc/html/AppendixE.html] > > > > E: putty source: source-is-missing [doc/html/Chapter10.html] > > > > E: putty source: source-is-missing [doc/html/Chapter2.html] > > > > E: putty source: source-is-missing [doc/html/Chapter3.html] > > > > E: putty source: source-is-missing [doc/html/Chapter4.html] > > > > E: putty source: source-is-missing [doc/html/Chapter5.html] > > > > E: putty source: source-is-missing [doc/html/Chapter7.html] > > > > E: putty source: source-is-missing [doc/html/Chapter8.html] > > > > E: putty source: source-is-missing [doc/html/Chapter9.html] > > > > E: putty source: source-is-missing [doc/html/IndexPage.html] > > > > > > > > This is pretty oversensitive. Firstly, it's HTML, which is still often > > > > enough written by hand anyway. As it happens, these particular HTML > > > > files are generated from halibut input that's also provided in the > > > > source package, though I can't see how Lintian could possibly expect to > > > > know that. > > Are you sure it is not embdeded base64 encoded png or minified javascript* ? > > If not we could try to know why it choke ? > > In this particular case, it is the source package that choke. If halibut > include the name of the source > in the html we could magically remove the source is missing warnings. > > Another alternative if we could determine the file was compiled by halibut, > we could demote to pedantic warning > and ask to repack in order to be sure to recompile from source.
There are far too many different HTML generators out there to handle. You would need to define a standard way to indicate the path to the source in the generated file. But some generator authors might consider this is an inacceptable data leak, so this would only be done if some environment variable is defined. In the short term, I suggest to disable it since there is no policy requirement for the source code to be in a particular path, so it is not an error. At the very least, it should not be generated more than once per package. Cheers, -- Bill. <ballo...@debian.org> Imagine a large red swirl here.
