Peter Pentchev wrote: > Oh... I think I see it now - it's just that it's an information notice, > not a warning or an error. In that case, it might be that it's your > call to decide to ignore it - and if so, sorry for the wasted time > again, and thanks for your response! Should I close the bug, or will you?
I don't understand why lintian emits even an I: for this. Policy does not seems to require splititng B-D in this case; there is no value in doing do; it is difficult and faulure-prone to do so; it can apparently require lintian overrides to get the split right, as we see in your patch. Given all these, maybe reassign to lintian? -- see shy jo
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
