Adam D. Barratt:
> On Tue, 2016-01-26 at 12:43 -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
>> Dear Adam,
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 05:39:52AM +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
>>> The tag description explicitly indicates that this is expected in the
>>> situation you describe.
>>
>> I know. I was under the impress
On Tue, 2016-01-26 at 12:43 -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
> Dear Adam,
>
> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 05:39:52AM +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > The tag description explicitly indicates that this is expected in the
> > situation you describe.
>
> I know. I was under the impression, though, that all
Dear Adam,
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 05:39:52AM +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> The tag description explicitly indicates that this is expected in the
> situation you describe.
I know. I was under the impression, though, that all false positives
are considered Lintian bugs.
--
Sean Whitton
sign
On Mon, 2016-01-25 at 21:19 -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
> package-contains-broken-symlink gives a false positive when a package
> contains a symlink to a file provided by another package, even when the
> package with the warning depends on the package providing the target of
> the symlink.
>
> For
Package: lintian
Version: 2.5.40.2
Severity: normal
Dear maintainers,
package-contains-broken-symlink gives a false positive when a package
contains a symlink to a file provided by another package, even when the
package with the warning depends on the package providing the target of
the symlink.
5 matches
Mail list logo