Theodore Ts'o wrote: > P.S. I'm going to be adding an override in e2fsprogs for > package-supports-alternative-init-but-no-init.d-script because it > has false positives
Regardless of the specifics of this particular package if Lintian could feasibly not emit this false-positive, would it surely not be more sensible to get this fixed there instead? That would not only be a cleaner solution than an override (which you would likely just have to remove later...) it would be a general kindness in that it could potentially save countless other developers undergoing the same manual process as you. > It most *definitely* is not certain. Again, this sounds like something trivially addressed in Lintian itself, or perhaps even by not reading too much into this apparently entirely-adjunct advisory classification that is, after all, not central to Lintian's operation. Best wishes, -- ,''`. : :' : Chris Lamb `. `'` la...@debian.org 🍥 chris-lamb.co.uk `-