Bug#959019: lintian: True or false positive for uses-dpkg-database-directly? Checking for a running dpkg by testing for locks on /var/lib/dpkg/lock
tags 959019 + moreinfo thanks Hi Axel, > So my question (mostly to Guillem, X-Debbugs-CC'ed): Does this file > really belong to the "internal interface", "the entire dpkg database, > its layout and files"? I think question can only be resolved by the dpkg maintainer(s) so I will mark this bug as 'moreinfo' here as there is no immediate next action from the Lintian maintainers point of view. Feel free to drop the moment this is resolved, and thank for for filing this and getting the relevant people involved here. Regards, -- ,''`. : :' : Chris Lamb `. `'` la...@debian.org 🍥 chris-lamb.co.uk `-
Processed: Re: Bug#959019: lintian: True or false positive for uses-dpkg-database-directly? Checking for a running dpkg by testing for locks on /var/lib/dpkg/lock
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > tags 959019 + moreinfo Bug #959019 [lintian] lintian: True or false positive for uses-dpkg-database-directly? Checking for a running dpkg by testing for locks on /var/lib/dpkg/lock Added tag(s) moreinfo. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 959019: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=959019 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
M m. B
Enviado desde mi iPhone
Processed: Bug#958945 marked as pending in lintian
Processing control commands: > tag -1 pending Bug #958945 [lintian] lintian: Should emit an error on non-debug files in dbgsym packages Added tag(s) pending. -- 958945: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=958945 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Re: New changelog commits in release cycle
Hi Chris, On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 2:18 PM Chris Lamb wrote: > > Happy to be convinced otherwise though. Like you, I am not fond of it. Besides, gbp-dch looks at tags (which are right) so you should be fine. Kind regards Felix Lechner
Re: New changelog commits in release cycle
Hi, > You are welcome to break history for this, if it makes sense. I have > not rebased any branches since your release. On balance I don't think it would be worth it, especially after there has been quite a few commits and time since the release; it's not just one or two changes after all. Happy to be convinced otherwise though. Regards, -- ,''`. : :' : Chris Lamb `. `'` la...@debian.org 🍥 chris-lamb.co.uk `-
Re: New changelog commits in release cycle
Hi Chris, You are welcome to break history for this, if it makes sense. I have not rebased any branches since your release. Kind regards, Felix Lechner On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 1:33 PM Chris Lamb wrote: > > Hi Felix, > > > > do you have some specific issue? > > > > I don't. I just hoped to avoid friction in the future if there had > > been any. Thanks for letting me know! > > I just went to look at the Lintian repository. So, I did not notice > any issue at the time of the release but it appears like I could not > push the release commits and tag. > > I've merged them back into master, including my release tag of the > time. > > > Regards, > > -- > ,''`. > : :' : Chris Lamb > `. `'` la...@debian.org chris-lamb.co.uk >`- >
Re: New changelog commits in release cycle
Hi Felix, > > do you have some specific issue? > > I don't. I just hoped to avoid friction in the future if there had > been any. Thanks for letting me know! I just went to look at the Lintian repository. So, I did not notice any issue at the time of the release but it appears like I could not push the release commits and tag. I've merged them back into master, including my release tag of the time. Regards, -- ,''`. : :' : Chris Lamb `. `'` la...@debian.org 🍥 chris-lamb.co.uk `-
Processed: Bug#959037 marked as pending in lintian
Processing control commands: > tag -1 pending Bug #959037 [lintian] lintian: possible false-positives for executable-in-usr-lib Added tag(s) pending. -- 959037: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=959037 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: Bug#959126 marked as pending in lintian
Processing control commands: > tag -1 pending Bug #959126 [lintian] lintian: description for package-uses-old-debhelper-compat-version needs update Added tag(s) pending. -- 959126: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=959126 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Bug#959037: lintian: FPOS? for executable-in-usr-lib
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 11:38:44PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote: > ACK. d-i won't be looking in /usr/libexec. Please leave things where > they are... Good, then @lintian-maint: please exclude udebs from this check :) (as I think used to be in the past, since I don't think I saw this tag years ago in this package, but I know it has been there for a while…) -- regards, Mattia Rizzolo GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18 4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540 .''`. More about me: https://mapreri.org : :' : Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri `. `'` Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia `- signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#959126: lintian: description for package-uses-old-debhelper-compat-version needs update
Package: lintian Version: 2.69.0 Severity: minor -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Since https://salsa.debian.org/lintian/lintian/-/commit/bc895a4b41571e8ae4d92ecb8f3ec9eb0f701958 lintian warns about a debhelper compat level < 13. Perfectly fine. But it looks like the description needs an update as well, currently we see: P: libobject-pad-perl source: package-uses-old-debhelper-compat-version 12 […] N:The compatibility version can be set by specifying debhelper-compat (= N:12) in your package's Build-Depends, by the legacy debian/compat file or N:even by setting and exporting DH_COMPAT in debian/rules. If it is not N:set in either place, debhelper defaults to the deprecated compatibility N:version 1. A simple s/12/13/ in the right file should be enough :) Cheers, gregor -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQKTBAEBCgB9FiEE0eExbpOnYKgQTYX6uzpoAYZJqgYFAl6prVtfFIAALgAo aXNzdWVyLWZwckBub3RhdGlvbnMub3BlbnBncC5maWZ0aGhvcnNlbWFuLm5ldEQx RTEzMTZFOTNBNzYwQTgxMDREODVGQUJCM0E2ODAxODY0OUFBMDYACgkQuzpoAYZJ qgbb/g//SPTQZGHpRjO1pv7PDgi4+MOhh0n5+yOrj0R9ku1VgNBnx2//iMlKJZ4S fjLWB1eP6C16cfqbc69tzLTL12HuEFZgnLbN4so0Zs05+Siuj+3gLmDpv8EWW4Ul 1L1SXLe7ZZ1JSE4OCCBsUUZp+XZtxoiFwy/OIUX2eTeeoPX3Jo0dR//kbaGrsVsE ewL2obAj3q5Q+dpanJpwpRWOWrJeVwMImwGsJ84h7XT7GmoLwncdOTdDJYwTnp49 l/hwXpwLcpc+Trrxsx3/op0wvV8nU3rnQyfy+Ty1nDvNqD2QtDRE3hJ24XYYaYQa sAN1PRUA5V5EOAtF6v+nRXZKy9ZiDfIpx5PIH5197Di4tLhztRclNQEIXoOqMoUD 5TTLV5Gz+HUWxpkFdq5PFuA9PXhmekIj4zlKB9BpGi+z1FHO4vswLbZJCHe4dOho P74TzyQPHmgxFlg9eTABe+IFzVBqEnqlVBvotkDpfX1tK3EjWm7/OMmRz8gGwK2W 4S2RxQHkHCEpXBqcOwYIevWsGacQwmZgwLvnxFq9ah+dMlTdR4CcPAthGHP3DBzZ xLtoOmIjO4tleudrQOY+vmlkrDNCuEz2isDCqL8hjg1cShjHOo8HZBbqVwZEMJqd 0+M2CcFBVL6SK+gDqvECLLGL52Cchaa15UyfoeKXRNd2FuOenck= =Qjb2 -END PGP SIGNATURE-
