Hi, On Fri, Feb 24, 2023 at 7:38 AM Jonas Smedegaard <d...@jones.dk> wrote: > > What to do when a package is blocked from getting updated due to it > being itself? > > I have tried replying to FTPmasters as invited in the rejection message, > but have been met with silence. > > I have tried filing bug#1030961 but have so far seen no response on that > either. > > Will it make sense to reassing that bugreport to the technical > committee? Or to the release team? Or should I request removal of the > package, because security bugfixes (however unlikely for a package > containing purely static data files) is impossible? > > > - Jonas > > Quoting Debian FTP Masters (2023-02-09 04:19:39) > > > > icc-profiles source: lintian output: 'license-problem-md5sum-non-free-file > > ECI-RGB.V1.0.icc usual name is ECI-RGB.V1.0.icc. Does not allow > > modification See also https://packages.debian.org/sid/icc-profiles.', > > automatically rejected package. [snip] > > icc-profiles source: lintian output: > > 'source-only-upload-to-non-free-without-autobuild ', automatically rejected > > package. > > icc-profiles source: If you have a good reason, you may override this > > lintian tag.
It's auto rejected. So I think it can be technically solved. For license-problem-md5sum-non-free-file, it's obviously a false positive from lintian. It should not emit such if the source is the non-free section. It should be reported as a bug for the lintian package. And you can submit patches as well, backport to the version that ftp-master server uses. For source-only-upload-to-non-free-without-autobuild, it's really a bug in your upload. You should fix it. -- Shengjing Zhu
