Author: jeroen
Date: 2006-03-26 15:42:31 +0200 (Sun, 26 Mar 2006)
New Revision: 588
Modified:
trunk/debian/changelog
trunk/debian/control
trunk/testset/runtests
trunk/unpack/unpack-srcpkg-l2
Log:
Replace r561 (surpress dpkg-source warnings in testsuite) by surpressing the
generation
Author: jeroen
Date: 2006-03-26 16:17:17 +0200 (Sun, 26 Mar 2006)
New Revision: 589
Added:
releases/1.23.16/
Log:
Tag 1.23.16
Copied: releases/1.23.16 (from rev 588, trunk)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Your message dated Sun, 26 Mar 2006 06:17:05 -0800
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#249435: fixed in lintian 1.23.16
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 Sun, 26 Mar 2006 06:17:06 -0800
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#357541: fixed in lintian 1.23.16
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 Sun, 26 Mar 2006 06:17:06 -0800
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#350653: fixed in lintian 1.23.16
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 Sun, 26 Mar 2006 06:17:06 -0800
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#349792: fixed in lintian 1.23.16
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 Sun, 26 Mar 2006 06:17:06 -0800
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#354890: fixed in lintian 1.23.16
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 Sun, 26 Mar 2006 06:17:06 -0800
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#351324: fixed in lintian 1.23.16
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 Sun, 26 Mar 2006 06:17:06 -0800
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#351624: fixed in lintian 1.23.16
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 Sun, 26 Mar 2006 06:17:06 -0800
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#353294: fixed in lintian 1.23.16
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 Sun, 26 Mar 2006 06:17:06 -0800
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#353770: fixed in lintian 1.23.16
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 Sun, 26 Mar 2006 06:17:06 -0800
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#349614: fixed in lintian 1.23.16
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 Sun, 26 Mar 2006 06:17:05 -0800
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#249435: fixed in lintian 1.23.16
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 Sun, 26 Mar 2006 06:17:06 -0800
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#349272: fixed in lintian 1.23.16
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
Accepted:
lintian_1.23.16.dsc
to pool/main/l/lintian/lintian_1.23.16.dsc
lintian_1.23.16.tar.gz
to pool/main/l/lintian/lintian_1.23.16.tar.gz
lintian_1.23.16_all.deb
to pool/main/l/lintian/lintian_1.23.16_all.deb
Announcing to debian-devel-changes@lists.debian.org
Closing bugs: 249435
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
package lintian
Ignoring bugs not assigned to: lintian
# Fixed in r591 by rra
tag 337034 + pending
Bug#337034: invalid-arch-string-in-source-relation does not know about some
architectures
Tags were: patch
Tags added: pending
tag 357433 + pending
On Sun, Mar 26, 2006 at 05:14:39PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
Hello folks,
Since I just spent some time looking over the discussion and the patch in
lintian bug #339829 to check for the Homepage information in the
description of packages and decided not to apply it, I figured I should
let
Package: lintian
Version: 1.23.15
Severity: wishlist
Please detect duplicate build-dependency relation, as in the current
links2 package:
Build-Depends: debhelper (= 4.0.0), libpng12-dev | libpng3-dev,
libtiff4-dev, libjpeg62-dev, libx11-dev, libgpmg1-dev [i386 ia64 alpha
Russ Allbery wrote:
I was looking at your lintian patch in #347169 with an eye to applying it,
but as near as I can tell, it's now unnecessary. Since you sent the
patch, xlibs-dev has been included in obsolete packages, so that part is
already done. The remaining section diagnoses
Josh Triplett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It looks like at least one package (showeq) depends on
x-window-system-core (also not for use in Depends),
The description of x-window-system-core explicitly says it's for use in
Depends, actually. It does say that it's for use in Depends for
20 matches
Mail list logo
