tags 801528 + moreinfo
thanks
Hi,
> lintian: package-contains-timestamped-gzip false positive
I believe this was "fixed" in src:debian-policy:
https://salsa.debian.org/dbnpolicy/policy/commit/d1103ecf57398ac8ef6e0dd123150b4f6eebc4d0
… but I was never sure this was bug to begin with. Any in
On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 03:39:27PM +0100, Tomasz Buchert wrote:
>
> I just noticed that in the version 9.20151004, d-s-nd is called by
> default by dh, however is *optional* in the sense that if not present,
> it won't be called.
debhelper Depends on dh-strip-nondeterminism so it is not quite
op
On 25/10/15 12:12, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> Hi Tomasz!
Hi Jakub,
>
> * Tomasz Buchert , 2015-10-25, 03:02:
> >Basically it looks as if dh-strip-nondeterminism/toolchain strips/will
> >strip so much that this tag may not be useful anymore.
>
> Well, not everybody uses dh-strip-nondeterminism. I don't u
Hi Tomasz!
* Tomasz Buchert , 2015-10-25, 03:02:
Basically it looks as if dh-strip-nondeterminism/toolchain strips/will
strip so much that this tag may not be useful anymore.
Well, not everybody uses dh-strip-nondeterminism. I don't use it in any
of my packages, and I will never will. (It's s
On 13/10/15 18:29, Axel Beckert wrote:
> Dear Bill,
>
> [...]
Hi guys,
I want to hijack this bug report to discuss the how the said tag
works. Note that *three* timestamps are considered here:
1) mtime *inside* .gz file (via RFC 1952, referred as to gz_mtime below)
2) mtime *of* the .gz fil
Dear Bill,
Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 02:51:25PM +, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 03:49:25PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > > Being compressed at buildtime is not a problem, since the timestamp stored
> > > is the original one, and it can be useful to
On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 02:51:25PM +, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 03:49:25PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > Being compressed at buildtime is not a problem, since the timestamp stored
> > is the original one, and it can be useful to preserve it.
>
> the timestamp stored on
On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 03:49:25PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> Being compressed at buildtime is not a problem, since the timestamp stored
> is the original one, and it can be useful to preserve it.
the timestamp stored on the gzip container is the one at build time.
And that's not useful at all
On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 03:35:40PM +0200, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> Hi Bill!
>
> * Bill Allombert , 2015-10-11, 22:10:
> >>The tag is emitted only if the timestamp is after the changelog.
> >Then maybe this test could be indicated in the lintian-info output ?
>
> Right, we should document it in the tag
Hi Bill!
* Bill Allombert , 2015-10-11, 22:10:
The tag is emitted only if the timestamp is after the changelog.
Then maybe this test could be indicated in the lintian-info output ?
Right, we should document it in the tag description.
I try to fix debian-policy... I have made a lot of progres
On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 06:24:49PM +, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 08:18:42PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > the tags package-contains-timestamped-gzip is documented as:
> >
> > N: The package contains a gzip-compressed file that has timestamps. Such
> > N: files make
On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 08:18:42PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> the tags package-contains-timestamped-gzip is documented as:
>
> N: The package contains a gzip-compressed file that has timestamps. Such
> N: files make the packages unreproducible, because their contents depend
> N: on the t
Package: lintian
Version: 2.5.38
Severity: normal
Dear Debian Lintian Maintainers,
the tags package-contains-timestamped-gzip is documented as:
N: The package contains a gzip-compressed file that has timestamps. Such
N: files make the packages unreproducible, because their contents depend
N:
13 matches
Mail list logo
