On Tuesday, 21 June 2022 22:40:52 CEST gregor herrmann wrote:
> > Would that work out for you?
>
> Yup.
> I'm cc'ing dod as the Config::Model::* tsar to make sure I'm not
> missing anything.
All good. Thanks for the follow-up
> > If so: What are your requirements for such a transition? Do we hav
Package: lintian
Version: 2.114.0
Severity: normal
Dear Maintainer,
When building prove6 package, lintian issues this warning:
W: prove6: unusual-interpreter /usr/bin/raku [usr/bin/prove6]
/usr/bin/raku is Raku (formely Perl6) interpreter provided by rakudo
package.
Could you add raku to the
On Tuesday, 10 July 2018 19:44:42 CEST Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> I'm CCing the lintian maintainers because I don't think they ever
> thought of that file as a public API, so they might want to be aware of
> this new reverse-dependency.
I can also use Lintian::Data API as done there:
https://salsa.d
Ive logged a bug to upstream YAML parser library:
https://github.com/ingydotnet/yaml-pm/issues/176
HTH
On samedi 6 mai 2017 13:01:50 CEST you wrote:
> Lintian uses the YAML::XS module to validate YAML in
> debian/upstream/metadata.
Unless debian/upstream/metadata needs fancy YAML format (e.g. anchor alias
tags ...), the easiest way out it to use YAML::Tiny instead of YAML::XS. This
should be a dr
Package: lintian
Version: 2.5.39
Severity: wishlist
Dear Maintainer,
Perl6 compiler (rakudo based on moar) expects scripts to begin
with '#!/usr/bin/perl6-m'
Could you add this interpreter to the list of accepted interpreters?
All the best
-- System Information:
Debian Release: stretch/sid
A
On Thursday 19 September 2013 16:16:19 you wrote:
> At the moment, I am not seeing any obvious merit in using Config::Model
> and I am not willing to invest the time to do it.
For the record, Config::Model has evolved since then. The command used to
check dpkg-copyright is now:
cme check dpkg-
Le Tuesday 27 September 2011 17:39:57, Jakub Wilk a écrit :
> FWIW, lintian uses this algorithm to determine type of a paragraph:
>
> if it's not the header paragraph {
> if Files field exists {
> it's a files paragraph
> } elsif License field exists {
> it's a stand-alone lice
> I was always under the impression that order of fields within a single
> paragraph doesn't matter in Debian control files.
Correct. But if you add "Extra fields", you may end up in trouble.
Consider the following (admitedly contrived) copyright paragraph:
Files: this license applies to any o
> It is included in the bug report:
Right. Sorry I missed it.
> I assumed these both check the file in the same manner; Can't tell if
> config-edit errs here or lintian. Just reporting my findings.
I guess that both tries to interpret correctly the DEP-5 specification...
Anyway, config-edit DE
Hello
I'm the author of Config::Model and the Dep-5 model. I'll try so bring some
light to the questions you are raising.
The following (probably truncated) error message:
Configuration item 'Files:"*" License short_name' has a wrong value:
license GPL-2+ is not declared in main License sect
On Thursday 07 July 2011 12:00:38 Niels Thykier wrote:
> Yesterday in #debian-qa, I chatted with Paul Wise and the idea came up
> that Lintian should be a framework that others could use as a basis for
> their own analysis - particularly when these analysis would conflict
> with some of the Lintian
12 matches
Mail list logo
