As I've come to understand it... since fwupd is in main and it
recommends a package not in main, then it violates policy 2.2.1
Since this directive is a 'must' I've changed the severity to 'serious'
as per the meanings of those severity levels.
Package: fwupd
Version: 1.7.4-2
Followup-For: Bug #988817
X-Debbugs-Cc: rharw...@club.cc.cmu.edu
It's been rather a while, so I no longer remember, but it may have just been
my own curiosity. I did check again and none of the apt* that I use seem to
complain.
Be well,
--Robbie
On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 1:27 PM Limonciello, Mario
wrote:
>
> [Public]
>
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 08:16:00PM +, Limonciello, Mario wrote:
> > > [Public]
> > >
> > > The package is present in Ubuntu (which shares the same source package as
> > Debian). So would prefer to keep it in
On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 08:16:00PM +, Limonciello, Mario wrote:
> [Public]
>
> The package is present in Ubuntu (which shares the same source package as
> Debian). So would prefer to keep it in place.
Just a thought, but couldn't you modify the build to dynamically add
this relationship
Package: fwupd
Version: 1.5.7-3
Severity: minor
X-Debbugs-Cc: rharw...@club.cc.cmu.edu
Dear Maintainer,
fwupd currently has:
Recommends: python3, bolt, dbus, secureboot-db, udisks2, fwupd-signed
but there is no package called secureboot-db.
May you be well,
--Robbie
-- System
5 matches
Mail list logo
