Bug#797395: [maintainer-script-should-not-use-adduser-system-without-home] false positivies

On 2015-08-30 21:49, Axel Beckert wrote: > Hi, > > [...] > > But where to make the cut? Just because a regexp uses "(?!…)"? Surely > not! Or because it is too long? Doesn't sound like a valid reason > either. > Personally, I would like to see fewer regexs myself. Not because we use weird

Bug#775667: lintian: Create a command line to suppress excess tags

On Mon, August 31, 2015 07:46, Niels Thykier wrote: > On 2015-08-30 20:28, Axel Beckert wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Niels Thykier wrote: Moreover minified js is a security risk so removing tag is not really an option >>> >>> The bug is not about removing the tag, it is about the amount of times

Bug#788926: lintian: regex deprecation warnings with perl 5.22

On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 06:04:37PM +0200, Bastien ROUCARIES wrote: > Could you restest now ? Normally it is fixed The last mail I sent to the BTS included a failure log from 2.5.36.1 which is the last uploaded version. Could you confirm what you would like me to retest (I couldn't see anything

Bug#788926: lintian: regex deprecation warnings with perl 5.22

On 2015-08-31 19:16, Dominic Hargreaves wrote: > On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 06:04:37PM +0200, Bastien ROUCARIES wrote: >> Could you restest now ? Normally it is fixed > > The last mail I sent to the BTS included a failure log from > 2.5.36.1 which is the last uploaded version. Could you confirm what

Bug#788926: lintian: regex deprecation warnings with perl 5.22

On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 07:29:46PM +0200, Niels Thykier wrote: > On 2015-08-31 19:16, Dominic Hargreaves wrote: > > On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 06:04:37PM +0200, Bastien ROUCARIES wrote: > >> Could you restest now ? Normally it is fixed > > > > The last mail I sent to the BTS included a failure log

Processed: tagging 788926

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > tags 788926 + pending Bug #788926 [src:lintian] lintian: FTBFS with perl 5.22: test failures/regex deprecation warnings Ignoring request to alter tags of bug #788926 to the same tags previously set > thanks Stopping processing here. Please

Bug#797600: lintian: FTBFS with perl 5.22 in experimental (MakeMaker changes)

Source: lintian Version: 2.5.36.1 Severity: important User: debian-p...@lists.debian.org Usertags: perl-5.22-transition makemaker-prefix Tags: sid stretch This package FTBFS with perl 5.22.0-2, which removed support for a long- obsolete way of overriding PREFIX when calling 'make install' with

Bug#797163: lintian: please warn if Arch:all package is not Multi-Archi: foreign

Hi again, Jakub, Am Montag, den 31.08.2015, 12:09 +0200 schrieb Jakub Wilk: > Python used to be the classic example: > "python" was an arch:all meta-package that depended on "python2.X". > But if a Python module depended on "python", it was because it needed a > Python interpreter of the same

Bug#797466: lintian: Correct grammar of dir-or-file-in-build-tree long description

* Niels Thykier , 2015-08-31, 07:39: I would have no idea what this tag is about if I didn't look at the code. It triggers when the package include files in /var/cache/pbuilder/build/ or /var/lib/sbuild/ or /var/lib/buildd/. But... how could it even happen that you ship

Bug#797395: [maintainer-script-should-not-use-adduser-system-without-home] false positivies

Hi Niels, Niels Thykier wrote: > > Anyway: I think we should _generally_ improve the situation and not > > duplicating functionality for a single tag. > > Flip-side: There is no much gain in it for us to have 20 distinct > "foo-installs-bar" tags when 1 could do. It is certainly a trade-off >

Bug#797163: lintian: please warn if Arch:all package is not Multi-Archi: foreign

Hi Fabian! * Fabian Greffrath , 2015-08-28, 13:46: Not every "Architecture: all" package can be marked as "Multi-Arch: foreign". Otherwise, we could just teach dpkg and APT to treat all arch:all packages as if they were ma:foreign and be done with it. :) could you please

Bug#797466: lintian: Correct grammar of dir-or-file-in-build-tree long description

* Niels Thykier , 2015-08-31, 12:55: lindsay.d.o:/srv/lintian.debian.org/history/tags/.dat Aren't those all false positives from #720910? I'm still curious to know how could it happen. I do not remember how or what happened. I can trace the tag back to #678857, which

Bug#797532: Please checks for /build and /tmp/buildd in dir-or-file-in-build-tree

Package: lintian Version: 2.5.36.1 Severity: wishlist Tags: patch X-Debbugs-CC: 797...@bugs.debian.org On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 01:17:36PM +0200, Jakub Wilk wrote: > * Niels Thykier , 2015-08-31, 12:55: > >lindsay.d.o:/srv/lintian.debian.org/history/tags/.dat > > Aren't those

Bug#797466: lintian: Correct grammar of dir-or-file-in-build-tree long description

On 2015-08-31 11:12, Jakub Wilk wrote: > * Niels Thykier , 2015-08-31, 07:39: >>> I would have no idea what this tag is about if I didn't look at the >>> code. It triggers when the package include files in >>> /var/cache/pbuilder/build/ or /var/lib/sbuild/ or /var/lib/buildd/.

Bug#797555: lintian: Correct grammar in maintainer-script-should-not-use-adduser-system-without-home tag

Package: lintian Version: 2.5.36.1 Severity: minor Tags: patch Hi, Patch attached that corrects grammar in the maintainer-script-should-not-use-adduser-system-without-home tag. Regards, -- ,''`. : :' : Chris Lamb `. `'` la...@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk `-

Bug#797556: lintian: False positive in maintainer-script-should-not-use-adduser-system-without-home if --system comes after --home

Package: lintian Version: 2.5.36.1 Hi, There is a false positive in the "maintainer-script-should-not-use-adduser-system-without-home" tag if the --system argument comes after --home. Whilst the adduser manpage suggests this wouldn't work, adduser will happily accept it. For example:

Processed: Re: Bug#797556: lintian: False positive in maintainer-script-should-not-use-adduser-system-without-home if --system comes after --home

Processing control commands: > forcemerge 797395 -1 Bug #797395 [lintian] [maintainer-script-should-not-use-adduser-system-without-home] false positivies Bug #797556 [lintian] lintian: False positive in maintainer-script-should-not-use-adduser-system-without-home if --system comes after --home

Bug#797556: lintian: False positive in maintainer-script-should-not-use-adduser-system-without-home if --system comes after --home

Control: forcemerge 797395 -1 On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 04:03:44PM +0200, Chris Lamb wrote: > Package: lintian > Version: 2.5.36.1 > > Hi, > > There is a false positive in the > "maintainer-script-should-not-use-adduser-system-without-home" tag if > the --system argument comes after --home. > >