On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 07:55:33AM +0200, Niels Thykier wrote: > Adrian Bunk: > > Source: debhelper > > Version: 13.1 > > Severity: serious > > Control: affects -1 src:esys-particle > > Control: block 961995 by -1 > > > > https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=esys-particle > > > > ... > > dh_installman -a > > dh_installman: warning: Section for ./debian/esysparticle.1 is computed as > > "2012-12-30", which is not a valid section > > dh_installman: error: Could not determine section for > > ./debian/esysparticle.1 > > dh_installman: error: Aborting due to earlier error > > make: *** [debian/rules:15: binary-arch] Error 25 > > > > > > debhelper (13.1) unstable; urgency=low > > ... > > * dh_installman: Improve error messages and handling of broken > > section numbers. Notably ignore (with a warning) sections from > > manpages that look suspiciously like a version number. Thanks > > to Paul Gevers for reporting the bug. (Closes: #958343) > > ... > > > > Hi Adrian,
Hi Niels, > I do not understand how you came to the conclusion that because > esys-particle has a completely broken manpage then debhelper should have > an RC bug. it is a FTBFS, so there has to be an RC bug somewhere. > Prior to that error, dh_installman silently installed it in > /usr/share/man/man2, which would clearly have been wrong: > > """ > $ apt-file show esys-particle | grep share/man/ > esys-particle: /usr/share/man/man2/esysparticle.2012-12-30.gz > """ > > Based on this, can we agree that this and future instances you find of > this case should in general be filed against packages containing the > manpage rather then debhelper? My reading of the debhelper changelog was that "ignore (with a warning)" means that this was not intended to cause an error. I might have misunderstood that. > ~Niels cu Adrian
