Le Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 11:00:54PM +0200, Jakub Wilk a écrit :
* Michael Tautschnig m...@debian.org, 2012-10-01, 14:25:
By policy, blank lines separate paragraphs, comments are
discarded, so we end up with an empty first paragraph. Policy,
however, requires that the *first* paragraph
On 2012-10-03 11:01, Michael Tautschnig wrote:
[...]
But then either all build infrastructure (and also lintian) don't use
debian/control, or all these tools tolerate that blank line (with the
exception
of pbuilder).
Best,
Michael
Lintian's parser ignores empty lines before/between
On 2012-10-03 11:01, Michael Tautschnig wrote:
[...]
But then either all build infrastructure (and also lintian) don't use
debian/control, or all these tools tolerate that blank line (with the
exception
of pbuilder).
Best,
Michael
Lintian's parser ignores empty lines
On 2012-10-03 12:02, Michael Tautschnig wrote:
On 2012-10-03 11:01, Michael Tautschnig wrote:
[...]
But then either all build infrastructure (and also lintian) don't use
debian/control, or all these tools tolerate that blank line (with the
exception
of pbuilder).
Best,
Michael
On Wed, 2012-10-03 at 11:48:10 +0200, Niels Thykier wrote:
On 2012-10-03 11:01, Michael Tautschnig wrote:
But then either all build infrastructure (and also lintian) don't use
debian/control, or all these tools tolerate that blank line (with the
exception
of pbuilder).
Lintian's
Hi,
While rebuilding our archive using pbuilder I noticed that all packages
build-depending on gnome-pkg-tools failed to build. That led me to filing
#684503, which I'll quote here for convenience:
| The file control.header ends with an empty blank line. As the contents of that
| file is
Michael Tautschnig writes (Comments+blank line in debian/control:
Clarification in policy or MBF?):
Taking a pragmatic position, it would be best to have policy acknowledge the
fact that empty paragraphs don't count, and get the parser in pbuilder fixed.
This wouldn't help people doing
On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 02:25:36PM +0100, Michael Tautschnig wrote:
- the problem affects all packages *build-depending* on gnome-pkg-tools, thus
I'd actually have to do an MBF (it's more than 160 packages)
It would be worth looking at a) whether those 160 packages have a common
maintainer,
Le lundi 01 octobre 2012 à 14:43 +0100, Ian Jackson a écrit :
This wouldn't help people doing backports or whatever. I think this
should be fixed in the packages involved.
Changing gnome-pkg-tools to replace the blank line with an empty comment
is trivial. In unstable.
How does that help
* Michael Tautschnig m...@debian.org, 2012-10-01, 14:25:
By policy, blank lines separate paragraphs, comments are discarded,
so we end up with an empty first paragraph. Policy, however, requires
that the *first* paragraph contains essential package information
(Policy 5.2).
I'm not convinced
Le lundi 01 octobre 2012 à 14:43 +0100, Ian Jackson a écrit :
This wouldn't help people doing backports or whatever. I think this
should be fixed in the packages involved.
Changing gnome-pkg-tools to replace the blank line with an empty comment
is trivial. In unstable.
How does that
Le Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 11:00:54PM +0200, Jakub Wilk a écrit :
* Michael Tautschnig m...@debian.org, 2012-10-01, 14:25:
By policy, blank lines separate paragraphs, comments are
discarded, so we end up with an empty first paragraph. Policy,
however, requires that the *first* paragraph contains
12 matches
Mail list logo
