Author: rra
Date: 2007-10-15 01:20:40 +0200 (Mon, 15 Oct 2007)
New Revision: 951
Modified:
trunk/checks/common_data.pm
trunk/debian/changelog
trunk/testset/binary/debian/control
Log:
* checks/common_data.pm:
+ [RA] Allow Homepage in source and binary packages.
Modified:
Author: rra
Date: 2007-10-15 01:34:16 +0200 (Mon, 15 Oct 2007)
New Revision: 952
Modified:
trunk/checks/description
trunk/checks/description.desc
trunk/debian/changelog
trunk/testset/binary/debian/control
trunk/testset/tags.binary
Log:
* checks/description{.desc,}:
+ [RA] Warn
Author: rra
Date: 2007-10-15 01:36:13 +0200 (Mon, 15 Oct 2007)
New Revision: 953
Modified:
trunk/checks/cruft.desc
trunk/debian/changelog
Log:
* checks/cruft.desc:
+ [RA] Fix incorrect tag name for patch failure files. Thanks, Romain
Francoise. (Closes: #437463)
Modified:
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
# Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.8
unmerge 444336
Bug#444336: lintian: promote the use of the Homepage field
Bug#339829: [checks/fields] test for best-practice homepage fields
Disconnected #444336 from all other
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
package lintian
Ignoring bugs not assigned to: lintian
# Fixed in r952 by rra
tag 444336 + pending
Bug#444336: lintian: promote the use of the Homepage field
Tags were: patch
Tags added: pending
thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me
Paul Wise [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Now that dpkg has the Homepage field[1], shall I update the patch to
warn when the homepage is in the description instead of the new field?
Or should we wait for policy and the devref to be updated?
1.
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
package lintian
Ignoring bugs not assigned to: lintian
# Fixed in r953 by rra
tag 437463 + pending
Bug#437463: [checks/cruft] unknown tag diff-contains-patch-failure-file
Tags were: patch
Tags added: pending
thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please
Author: rra
Date: 2007-10-15 02:32:39 +0200 (Mon, 15 Oct 2007)
New Revision: 954
Added:
trunk/testset/binary/debian/NEWS.Debian
Modified:
trunk/checks/changelog-file
trunk/checks/changelog-file.desc
trunk/collection/changelog-file
trunk/collection/changelog-file.desc
Author: rra
Date: 2007-10-15 02:34:32 +0200 (Mon, 15 Oct 2007)
New Revision: 955
Modified:
trunk/checks/nmu.desc
trunk/debian/changelog
Log:
* checks/nmu.desc:
+ [RA] Remove obsolete note about binary NMUs. Patch from Thijs
Kinkhorst. (Closes: #437925)
Modified:
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
package lintian
Ignoring bugs not assigned to: lintian
# Fixed in r954 by rra
tag 437707 + pending
Bug#437707: check NEWS.Debian release field
There were no tags set.
Tags added: pending
thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you
Paul Wise [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Package: lintian
Version: 1.23.34
Severity: wishlist
Please add a check to search the .deb for windows thumbnail databases.
These are generally useless in Debian binary packages and just take up
space. They will be named Thumbs.db (or any variation in
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
package lintian
Ignoring bugs not assigned to: lintian
# Fixed in r955 by rra
tag 437925 + pending
Bug#437925: source-nmu-has-incorrect-version-number mentions old binNMU style
Tags were: patch
Tags added: pending
thanks
Stopping processing here.
On Sun, 2007-10-14 at 17:36 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
If you do see ones with a variation in case, let me know.
The glest-data package contains the lowercased variation:
http://packages.debian.org/search?searchon=contentskeywords=Thumbs.dbmode=filenamesuite=unstablearch=any
--
bye,
pabs
Daniel Leidert [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Package: lintian
Version: 1.23.34
Severity: normal
Hi,
I'm in doubt about the install-sgmlcatalog-deprecated check. It seems,
this check was added during fixing http://bugs.debian.org/90019. It
seems, we are required to put install-sgmlcatalog
Bernd Zeimetz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
On Sun, Sep 30, 2007 at 01:30:33AM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
Therefore please fix lintian to allow python-all as build-dep in
arch: all packages, too. Also the I: is not right here, python-all-dev
would be the package one
Ben Hutchings [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Package: lintian
Version: 1.23.34
Severity: normal
The ion3-doc package contains two files with two names (hard-links)
each:
/usr/share/doc/ion3-doc/ionconf/{ionconf,index}.html
/usr/share/doc/ion3-doc/ionconf/{ionnotes,index}.html
In a
Paul Wise [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sun, 2007-10-14 at 17:36 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
If you do see ones with a variation in case, let me know.
The glest-data package contains the lowercased variation:
Sune Vuorela [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Package: lintian
Version: 1.23.34
Severity: important
KDE has a history of using desktop files for all sorts of things, not
only for applications and such.
for example kdegraphics, a fairly minor kde package, there is now around
10 errors and 60
Russ Allbery [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I can, but I'd like to understand why KDE is generating so many invalid
desktop files. For example, the kruler applnk desktop file contains
essentially nothing at all and looks completely pointless. What is that
file actually accomplishing? Does it
lintian_1.23.35_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
lintian_1.23.35.dsc
lintian_1.23.35.tar.gz
lintian_1.23.35_all.deb
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble?
Accepted:
lintian_1.23.35.dsc
to pool/main/l/lintian/lintian_1.23.35.dsc
lintian_1.23.35.tar.gz
to pool/main/l/lintian/lintian_1.23.35.tar.gz
lintian_1.23.35_all.deb
to pool/main/l/lintian/lintian_1.23.35_all.deb
Override entries for your package:
lintian_1.23.35.dsc - source devel
Your message dated Mon, 15 Oct 2007 05:47:04 +
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#440825: fixed in lintian 1.23.35
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now
Your message dated Mon, 15 Oct 2007 05:47:04 +
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#438860: fixed in lintian 1.23.35
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now
Your message dated Mon, 15 Oct 2007 05:47:04 +
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#438203: fixed in lintian 1.23.35
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now
Your message dated Mon, 15 Oct 2007 05:47:04 +
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#444661: fixed in lintian 1.23.35
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now
Your message dated Mon, 15 Oct 2007 05:47:03 +
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#437925: fixed in lintian 1.23.35
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now
Your message dated Mon, 15 Oct 2007 05:47:04 +
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#440830: fixed in lintian 1.23.35
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now
Your message dated Mon, 15 Oct 2007 05:47:04 +
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#442711: fixed in lintian 1.23.35
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now
Your message dated Mon, 15 Oct 2007 05:47:04 +
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#442709: fixed in lintian 1.23.35
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now
Your message dated Mon, 15 Oct 2007 05:47:03 +
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#437463: fixed in lintian 1.23.35
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now
Your message dated Mon, 15 Oct 2007 05:47:04 +
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#438602: fixed in lintian 1.23.35
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now
Your message dated Mon, 15 Oct 2007 05:47:04 +
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#444651: fixed in lintian 1.23.35
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now
Your message dated Mon, 15 Oct 2007 05:47:03 +
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#438202: fixed in lintian 1.23.35
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now
Your message dated Mon, 15 Oct 2007 05:47:03 +
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#437707: fixed in lintian 1.23.35
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now
Your message dated Mon, 15 Oct 2007 05:47:04 +
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#444642: fixed in lintian 1.23.35
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now
35 matches
Mail list logo
