On Wednesday 06 August 2008 01:56:59 Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote:
Joey Hess wrote:
Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote:
If the policy suggestion that leads to that lintian warning is so
unreasonable, it might as well be taken off the policy.
I'm not aware of any such thing in policy
Then maybe
On Aug 5, 2008, at 6:34 PM| Aug 5, 2008, Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote:
Except, perhaps, from scripts which end up installed in the
directories
in the path. For scripts that are not in the path (and even if the
execute bit set can only be executed with extra measures from the
user)
it should
Thijs Kinkhorst [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tuesday 5 August 2008 14:02, Richard Hurt wrote:
W: package: script-non-executable -- Since this is a scripted
web application (RoR) there are quite a few scripts that are not
executable directly in the shell. Can I turn this warning off for
I am getting quite a few lintian warnings that I would like to quell.
Do we have any best practices on how to deal with these messages?
W: package: debian-copyright-line-too-long -- As I understand it
long lines are now OK. I am following the new, proposed guidelines
for the copyright
Richard Hurt escreveu:
W: package: script-non-executable -- Since this is a scripted web
application (RoR) there are quite a few scripts that are not
executable directly in the shell. Can I turn this warning off for
these files?
If the scripts are not directly executable, you can remove
Hi Richard,
On Tuesday 5 August 2008 14:02, Richard Hurt wrote:
I am getting quite a few lintian warnings that I would like to quell.
Do we have any best practices on how to deal with these messages?
W: package: debian-copyright-line-too-long -- As I understand it
long lines are now OK. I
Hi
Dne Tue, 5 Aug 2008 08:02:28 -0400
Richard Hurt [EMAIL PROTECTED] napsal(a):
I am getting quite a few lintian warnings that I would like to quell.
Do we have any best practices on how to deal with these messages?
W: package: debian-copyright-line-too-long -- As I understand it
Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote:
If the scripts are not directly executable, you can remove the
#!interpreter line from them. That should make the warning go away.
It would be better to talk with upstream so he does that.
If I were upstream and was pestered by a distribution to remove the
Michal Čihař [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Richard Hurt [EMAIL PROTECTED] napsal(a):
W: package: package-contains-empty-directory -- Some of these are
necessary (cache, assets, etc.) and some aren't (test). Can I turn
these off?
Yes, add override for these.
Lintian does not warn about
Joey Hess wrote:
Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote:
If the scripts are not directly executable, you can remove the
#!interpreter line from them. That should make the warning go away.
It would be better to talk with upstream so he does that.
If I were upstream and was pestered by a
Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote:
If the policy suggestion that leads to that lintian warning is so
unreasonable, it might as well be taken off the policy.
I'm not aware of any such thing in policy.
--
see shy jo
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Joey Hess wrote:
Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote:
If the policy suggestion that leads to that lintian warning is so
unreasonable, it might as well be taken off the policy.
I'm not aware of any such thing in policy
Then maybe the lintian warning could be removed.
--
BOFH excuse #376:
Eduardo M KALINOWSKI [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Joey Hess wrote:
Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote:
If the policy suggestion that leads to that lintian warning is so
unreasonable, it might as well be taken off the policy.
I'm not aware of any such thing in policy
Then maybe the lintian warning
13 matches
Mail list logo
