Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> tags 766118 - moreinfo
Bug #766118 [lintian] lintian: False positive for
“missing-license-paragraph-in-dep5-copyright”
Removed tag(s) moreinfo.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
--
766118: http://bugs.
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 moreinfo
Bug #766118 [lintian] lintian: False positive for
“missing-license-paragraph-in-dep5-copyright”
Added tag(s) moreinfo.
--
766118: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=766118
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with
On 2014-10-21 07:57, Niels Thykier wrote:
> Control: tags -1 moreinfo
>
> [...]
>
> Hi Ben,
>
> It is because you added the "License" to the "header" paragraph[0][1].
>
> It is unclear to me that this counts as a "stand-alone" license
> paragraph, but Lintian was coded with the assumption that
Control: tags -1 moreinfo
On 2014-10-21 01:54, Ben Finney wrote:
> Package: lintian
> Version: 2.5.28
> Severity: normal
>
> The check for “missing-license-paragraph-in-dep5-copyright” apparently
> assumes that any license must have its own separate “License”
> paragraph.
>
> This restriction do
Le Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 10:45:49AM +1100, Ben Finney a écrit :
> On 19-Sep-2014, Charles Plessy wrote:
> > I have a package where the machine-readable copyright file has the
> > following licence field in its header.
> >
> > License: GPL-2 and MIT and GPL-3+ with runtime exception and zlib
> >
Ben Finney writes:
> On 20-Oct-2014, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> I don't see any problem with Lintian 2.5.28, and I see on the Lintian
>> report page that it was processed with Lintian 2.5.26.
> I see the problem with Lintian 2.5.28::
> =
> $ lintian --version
> Lintian v2.5.28
> $ lintian ../bu
On 20-Oct-2014, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I don't see any problem with Lintian 2.5.28, and I see on the Lintian
> report page that it was processed with Lintian 2.5.26.
I see the problem with Lintian 2.5.28::
=
$ lintian --version
Lintian v2.5.28
$ lintian ../build-area/lojban-common_1.5+dfsg.1-2
Ben Finney writes:
> The check for “missing-license-paragraph-in-dep5-copyright” apparently
> assumes that any license must have its own separate “License”
> paragraph.
I'm not sure what's going on here, but it's definitely not that. I put
the license text immediately after the License header i
Package: lintian
Version: 2.5.28
Severity: normal
The check for “missing-license-paragraph-in-dep5-copyright” apparently
assumes that any license must have its own separate “License”
paragraph.
This restriction does not match Debian policy for the DEP-5 format;
the stand-alone “License” paragraph
On 19-Sep-2014, Charles Plessy wrote:
> I have a package where the machine-readable copyright file has the
> following licence field in its header.
>
> License: GPL-2 and MIT and GPL-3+ with runtime exception and zlib
> BEDTools combines source code under GPL-2, LGPL-2.1 and MIT licenses,
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> limit source lintian
Limiting to bugs with field 'source' containing at least one of 'lintian'
Limit currently set to 'source':'lintian'
> tags 766033 + pending
Bug #766033 [lintian] [checks/rules] empty debian/rules -> Use of uninitialized
valu
This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script.
nthykier pushed a change to branch master
in repository lintian.
from 6b1f37d c/src-copyright.pm: Optimise for "*" and "dir/*" wildcards
new e73f842 c/rules.pm: Fix undef warning on empty rules file
The 1 revis
This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script.
nthykier pushed a change to branch master
in repository lintian.
from 7366d6a c/watch-file.pm: Fix undef warning
new 6b1f37d c/src-copyright.pm: Optimise for "*" and "dir/*" wildcards
The 1 revisions listed abo
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> limit source lintian
Limiting to bugs with field 'source' containing at least one of 'lintian'
Limit currently set to 'source':'lintian'
> tags 765995 + pending
Bug #765995 [lintian] lintian: Use of uninitialized value $base in substitution
(s//
This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script.
nthykier pushed a change to branch master
in repository lintian.
from b5f9842 c/src-copyright.pm: Optimise out linear scan over index
new 7366d6a c/watch-file.pm: Fix undef warning
The 1 revisions listed above
This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script.
nthykier pushed a change to branch master
in repository lintian.
from be93c22 ubuntu/.../known-dists: Add "vivid"
new b5f9842 c/src-copyright.pm: Optimise out linear scan over index
The 1 revisions listed above
This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script.
nthykier pushed a change to branch master
in repository lintian.
from e762015 Implement new build profile syntax
new be93c22 ubuntu/.../known-dists: Add "vivid"
The 1 revisions listed above as "new" are entirel
Package: lintian
Version: 2.5.28
Severity: wishlist
Hi,
it seems that GDM now uses the DesktopNames property [1] to set the
XDG_CURRENT_DESKTOP environment variable. The key is not in the last
released spec [2] but I guess they'll be added soon, so it'd make sense
to support it in lintian.
Regar
This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script.
nthykier pushed a commit to branch master
in repository lintian.
commit be93c22af022adf1017e9f6e032de0cab27e725a
Author: Niels Thykier
Date: Mon Oct 20 18:40:04 2014 +0200
ubuntu/.../known-dists: Add "vivid"
Signe
Package: lintian
Version: 2.5.28
Severity: minor
Empty debian/rules triggers the following warning:
Use of uninitialized value $start in pattern match (m//) at
/usr/share/lintian/checks/rules.pm line 142.
--
Jakub Wilk
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-lint-maint-requ...@lists.debian.org
wit
Package: lintian
Version: 2.5.28
Severity: minor
Dear Lintian Maintainers,
a broken debian/watch file caused an interesting lintian behaviour.
Given a watch file like this:
version=3
opts=pgpsigurlmangle=s/$/.asc/
http://www.example.com/Downloads/code-(.+)code\.zip
This watch file has two issu
21 matches
Mail list logo
