Hi! The description of the package-contains-broken-symlink tag makes it sound like lintian has actually checked the packages dependencies:
I: package-contains-broken-symlink N: N: The package contains a symlink but the destination for the link does N: not exist in the package nor in its direct dependencies. N: N: Severity: normal, Certainty: wild-guess N: N: Check: symlinks, Type: binary, udeb But it has not -- it has only checked the dependencies that are in the same group/changes file. Packages with a symlink to a file or directory provided by a package they depend upon but where that package is built from a different source will raise this tag. Can I suggest improved wording for this tag? I: package-contains-broken-symlink N: N: The package contains a symlink but the destination for the link does N: not exist in the package or in its direct dependencies that were checked N: at the same time. N: N: Severity: normal, Certainty: wild-guess N: N: Check: symlinks, Type: binary, udeb (running "lintian foo.deb bar.deb" still isn't enough so the 'same time' wording isn't perfect, but it's a start and at least won't have people wondering why lintian is claiming to have checked dependencies when it has not.) cheers Stuart -- Stuart Prescott http://www.nanonanonano.net/ stu...@nanonanonano.net Debian Developer http://www.debian.org/ stu...@debian.org GPG fingerprint BE65 FD1E F4EA 08F3 23D4 3C6D 9FE8 B8CD 71C5 D1A8 GPG fingerprint 90E2 D2C1 AD14 6A1B 7EBB 891D BBC1 7EBB 1396 F2F7 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org