Sune Vuorela <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 2005-11-15, Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> "fakeroot debian/rules binary" directly won't get bitten. Other than >> that, I would do nothing - it is a bug, therefore a lintian override is >> inappropriate, but it is not serious enough to justify messing with the >> tarball. > > So you suggest that I do not repack source and do not add overrides ? > > http://ftp-master.debian.org/REJECT-FAQ.html > about lintian in the serious violations-part > "Sometimes there are valid reasons, but then you should either file a > bug against lintian if it's generally wrong or include an override in > your package, giving a reason in the changelog for it"
I wasn't aware that it is a new package. Anyway, I assume the rationale for the lintian error is that this *might* screw up builds badly. But on the other hand, there are ways to prevent that, and I don't think that if a maintainer chooses to do so, he should instead be forced to repackage the source. I don't know how communication with the ftp-masters works these days; ideally they would read through files in the debian dir (what about README.ftp-masters :-)...) and find your note about the reasoning. I would not just add a lintian overrides without having the package double-checked by a person who really understands the issues and verifies that the files will really be out of effect. Just my 2c, Frank -- Frank Küster Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich Debian Developer
