Ben Finney <ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au> 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 ../build-area/lojban-common_1.5+dfsg.1-2.dsc > W: lojban-common source: missing-license-paragraph-in-dep5-copyright > public-domain (paragraph at line 43) > ===== > just as in the online Lintian log. > Why would your Lintian and mine report the same version, but get > different results operating on ‘lojban-common’ at the same Debian > release? Because I thought this check would run on the binary package and didn't run it on the source package. Sorry! So there's still a bug here. But it's not the bug that you stated in your original message, since there's a whole ton of logic in Lintian to recognize License paragraphs included in Files stanzas, and this doesn't happen with other packages. I'm not at all sure what's actually going on. For some reason, this copyright file is failing to parse properly. I spent some time looking at the code and couldn't figure out where it was failing. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
