Marc Haber:
Package: dh-debputy Version: 0.1.86 Severity: normalHi, this is an excerpt from debcraft's output which is attributed to debputy lint: [...]
Hi Marc, Thanks for filing this bug.The `debputy` program uses `hunspell` as its core spellchecking engine. Since `hunspell` is a general text purpose spellchecker, it has more false positives on technical texts. I have considered to change to a different engine, but `hunspell` was the only one that is trivial to use in `debputy` at the time of writing.
For the cases you mention, I will apply a case-by-case review of how you might handle them for now.
31_aide_systemd, 31_aide_ldconfig etc are file names in my package that have been there for 20 years. Those certainly are not spelling errors.
I will try to add a general exception to these patterns. Short term, you can use the quoting technique below.
SCRIPTRETVAL is a variable that I won't rename just to silence debputy.
That should have been excluded already. But I think the leading $ confused the logic. I will correct that shortly. As mentioned, the quoting can be used as a work around for now if needed be.
libselinux1-dev, libselinux-dev, ... are package names proper.
Personally, I wrap these in `-quotes though "-quotes also work. As an example:
* Switch Build-Depends-Arch from `libselinux1-dev` to `libselinux-dev` OR * Switch Build-Depends-Arch from "libselinux1-dev" to "libselinux-dev"Using quotes makes `debputy` ignore the word. Note there is no support for escaping here, though I have not seen it be needed so far either.
The reason why we cannot add a general exception to these is that their patterns are indistinguishable from abbreviations or words. Like `well-known`, `nitty-gritty` where the spellchecker should catch the odd typo.
There is an exception if the word contains two `-`. So libfoo-bar-dev would not trigger a spelling check. There are valid words with 2+ `-` in them (such as `state-of-the-art`), but they ended up on the other side of this trade-off for me at the I made the exception.
[...] md5, sha1, rmd160, and haval [...]?
For these, I will add them to the list of known words / technical jargon. The list already contained the `md5sum` (etc.) command.
> debsecan > debsums > autotoolsWhile I am not adding package name in general (too much churn), I am also fine with adding debsecan and debsums, since they seem to be Debian specific and stable in their naming. I have already added special cases for other central Debian tools like dpkg and debhelper.
I am also adding `autotools` since it is likely to affect a lot of packages and is unlikely to change at this point.
The quoting trick also work for these cases if you need an immediate solution.
What would be the correct spelling to get rid of this message? Does debputy offer a possibility to silence certain errors for certain files? Greetings Marc [...]
As mentioned, the general case is to using quoting. The `debputy` engine has some built-in exceptions we can add to for general cases.
I will add a documentation note to `man:debputy(1)` about the quoting and close the bug with these changes (the docs + the updates to the exceptions).
Best regards, Niels
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
