Hi,
On 09/03/2017 06:20 AM, Paul Hardy wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 2, 2017 at 1:41 PM, Chris Lamb wrote:
>> ...
>> See #870722. This was fixed in 4th August in:
>>
>>
>> https://anonscm.debian.org/git/lintian/lintian.git/commit/?id=126157380dc0eba302f3d476b1cffc13f968c207
>
> That is great. The nex
tags 870069 + pending
thanks
Hi Paul,
> That is great. The next lintian release should be able to close this
> bug then
Neat; this will now happen:
https://anonscm.debian.org/git/lintian/lintian.git/commit/?id=aac752818108df9bfc9244d8a215003f67d10ec6
Regards,
--
,''`.
: :' :
Chris,
On Sat, Sep 2, 2017 at 1:41 PM, Chris Lamb wrote:
> Paul,
>
>> Oh, I see. Personally, my only concern was that a lintian error would
>> prevent an uploaded, released package from migrating to testing.
>
> Hm? Lintian has no effect on migrations from unstable to testing.
I never knew that
Paul,
> Oh, I see. Personally, my only concern was that a lintian error would
> prevent an uploaded, released package from migrating to testing.
Hm? Lintian has no effect on migrations from unstable to testing.
> I did not think it should be a lintian error, because not having the
> file does n
Chris,
On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 11:08 PM, Chris Lamb wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
>> > Can you think of another way your particular versions could be
>> > detected?
>>
>> Sorry, I don't understand what you mean by "versions". I do use a
>> watch file for Unifont
>
> Nothing to do with watchfiles, but rathe
Hi Paul,
> > Can you think of another way your particular versions could be
> > detected?
>
> Sorry, I don't understand what you mean by "versions". I do use a
> watch file for Unifont
Nothing to do with watchfiles, but rather I want to work out somehow
we can not emit this tag until you are re
Chris,
On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 8:11 AM, Chris Lamb wrote:
>
> Can you think of another way your particular versions could be
> detected?
Sorry, I don't understand what you mean by "versions". I do use a
watch file for Unifont; here is the heart of it:
opts=pgpsigurlmangle=s/$/.sig/ \
ftp:/
Paul,
> > Perhaps we could also ignore "UNRELEASED" in the distribution? Or
> > is there something else we could check for in the version...?
>
> […] I only change UNRELEASED to unstable at the very end
I'm sure this is very common. Indeed, I think I do it myself.
Can you think of another way y
Chris,
On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 1:55 AM, Chris Lamb wrote:
>
> Hey Stefan and Paul,
>
> > orig-tarball-missing-upstream-signature error breaks rebuilding
> > existing packages
>
> The next version of Lintian will ignore "repacked" tarballs - ones
> that contain "dfsg" in their version.
That certai
Hey Stefan and Paul,
> orig-tarball-missing-upstream-signature error breaks rebuilding
> existing packages
The next version of Lintian will ignore "repacked" tarballs - ones
that contain "dfsg" in their version.
Perhaps we could also ignore "UNRELEASED" in the distribution? Or
is there something
I second the request that this lintian check just be a warning, not an error.
Please also accept binary signature files--and I realize more than
just lintian will have to change to support that. The GNU Project's
files are signed with "gpg -b" to produce a binary ".sig" file for
uploading to ftp.
Package: lintian
Version: 2.5.52
Hi,
I think "error" is a rather unfortunate choice for the severity level of
"orig-tarball-missing-upstream-signature".
* I have some (existing) packages uploaded on build.opensuse.org, and
they now fail to build for "Debian_Next" (buster). I'd rather avoid
12 matches
Mail list logo