> It is included in the bug report: Right. Sorry I missed it.
> I assumed these both check the file in the same manner; Can't tell if > config-edit errs here or lintian. Just reporting my findings. I guess that both tries to interpret correctly the DEP-5 specification... Anyway, config-edit DEP-5 parser is tripped off by the X-Note comment placed before the License keyword in the stand-alone license paragraph. DEP-5 mentions that "Extra fields can be added to any paragraph.", but does not specify whether these extra fields can be appended or prepended to paragraphs. :-( Anyway, I can make the parser more tolerant. This will be fixed in next Config::Model release. This does not answer the question whether lintian should call config-edit or not. I'll let lintian maintainer decide. I'm ready to answer any question they may have. All the best Dominique -- http://config-model.wiki.sourceforge.net/ -o- http://search.cpan.org/~ddumont/ http://www.ohloh.net/accounts/ddumont -o- http://ddumont.wordpress.com/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.