Package: lintian
Version: 2.5.75
Severity: normal
Ohai,
I think the check for debian-rules-is-dh_make-template instroduced in
d0fec9183b5977fa8f5e0a779631bb140ee3415d is too broad.
Just because d/rules has '# See debhelper(7) (uncomment to enable)' as
the second line, does not mean the author
4e4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Evgeni Golov <evg...@debian.org>
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2016 10:15:32 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] correct spelling of Lua
the language is called Lua, not lua or LUA
See: http://www.lua.org/about.html#name
---
data/spelling/corrections-case | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 i
Ohai,
On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 10:23:58PM +0200, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
> Le mercredi, 5 octobre 2016, 20.08:31 h CEST Chris Lamb a écrit :
> > Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
> > > But all-in-all, what matters is the dependency, as there were no changes
> > > since 2013 (4.1+Debian10), and
Package: lintian
Version: 2.5.38.1
Severity: wishlist
The spec mandates that the extension of the listed alias matches
the extension of the unit itself.
http://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/systemd.unit.html#Alias=
Patch follows :)
-- System Information:
Debian Release: stretch/sid
control: tags -1 + patch
>From 5628625c10222427122beb97196dbcdeb1017edb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Evgeni Golov <evg...@debian.org>
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2015 09:31:02 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] check if systemd service alias has an .service extension
Closes: #808369
---
checks/sys
old saned@.service as you write
you had "saned" in the alias field? Or was it "saned.service"?
Regards
Evgeni
[1] http://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/systemd.unit.html#Alias=
>From 5f32595c52838ef9d21046229bd7a79960a02c6e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Evgeni Golov &l
Package: lintian
Version: 2.5.36.1
Severity: minor
Hi,
filling bug as requested in #debconf.
When running lintian on the source of some shady package [1]
(not in the archive), I get quite some warnings from perl:
Complex regular subexpression recursion limit (32766) exceeded at
Control: tags -1 + patch
On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 01:53:59PM +0200, Evgeni Golov wrote:
We should special-case public-domain here probably.
patch incl tests attached :)
From 548ff0f74e65df31eb5d683a0414395054955c84 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Evgeni Golov evg...@debian.org
Date: Sat, 30 May
Package: lintian
Version: 2.5.31
Severity: minor
Hi,
public-domain has a special meaning in DEP5, [1] states: When the License
field in a paragraph has the short name public-domain, the remaining lines of
the field must explain exactly what exemption the corresponding files for
that paragraph
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 09:29:25PM +0100, Niels Thykier wrote:
Thanks, applied. It is my understanding this does not cover all the
false-positives mentioned so I have not tagged the bug pending.
Thanks. Yeah, that's why I didn't tag the bug patch either.
I wonder how many (overriden) results
The MPL-2.0 contains the following paragraph:
1.12. Secondary License
means either the GNU General Public License, Version 2.0, the GNU
Lesser General Public License, Version 2.1, the GNU Affero General
Public License, Version 3.0, or any later versions of those
licenses.
Package: lintian
Version: 2.2.17
Severity: minor
Hi,
I was just checking one of my packages and got the following warning:
W: thinkfan: manpage-has-errors-from-man usr/share/man/man1/thinkfan.1.gz
Invalid or incomplete multibyte or wide character
N:
N:This man page provokes warnings or
0b9cdf9418031157670e0ff65028f90f33560df4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Evgeni Golov evg...@debian.org
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 01:57:10 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Architecture dependent packages should contain arch-dependent
content
A package that is not arch:all should contain at least one file
b8cc161335fed98e57d0a8e359dba32f2f209de1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Evgeni Golov sarge...@die-welt.net
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 18:09:53 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] read $license-X+ as $license X or later in debian/copyright
---
checks/copyright-file |3 ++-
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff
On Mon, 02 Feb 2009 12:26:37 -0600 Raphael Geissert wrote:
I suspect there's still arguably a bug in such a package, since this would
imply that the upstream license statement wasn't cut and pasted into the
debian/copyright file, as is recommended best practice even with the new
Package: lintian
Version: 2.1.6
Severity: wishlist
Hi,
currently lintian trows a changelog-should-mention-nmu when I do
* Non-maintainer upload with ACK from maintainer.
in debian/changelog.
One can workaround this with
* Non-maintainer upload, ACKed by maintainer.
but that's not optimal :)
:
Bruce Schneier's abs are NP-hard.
From 90ed079b26e8d78a6aa814d60d7545d89cb270c9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Evgeni Golov sarge...@die-welt.net
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2009 18:58:04 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] shout on people hardcoding libc6 in their debian/control file
One should not hardcode a Depends
a new secure certificate, he uses Bruce Schneier as the
signing authority.
From 90ed079b26e8d78a6aa814d60d7545d89cb270c9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Evgeni Golov sarge...@die-welt.net
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2009 18:58:04 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] shout on people hardcoding libc6 in their debian/control file
Package: lintian
Severity: wishlist
Hi,
while backporting a package (scorched3d) for etch, I found the package
depending on debhelper = 5.0.0 but using dh_icons which was introduced
in 5.0.51[1], which first resulted in a build-error on etch.
Wouldn't it be nice if lintian would know about dh_*
19 matches
Mail list logo
