tags 907423 + pending
thanks
Fixed in Git, pending upload:
https://salsa.debian.org/lintian/lintian/commit/2e52f1aaf612b03701502b6503a300cb87fb520f
checks/changes-file.desc | 11 +++
checks/changes-file.pm | 8 +
debian/change
Control: tags -1 - moreinfo
On Thu, Sep 06, 2018 at 11:32:07AM +0100, Chris Lamb wrote:
> tags 907423 + moreinfo
> thanks
>
> Hi Adrian,
>
> > > > lintian should give an error when both foo-dbg and foo-dbgsym are
> > > > built
>
> Sorry for the delay in getting back to you. I wonder; why not re
tags 907423 + moreinfo
thanks
Hi Adrian,
> > > lintian should give an error when both foo-dbg and foo-dbgsym are
> > > built
Sorry for the delay in getting back to you. I wonder; why not rely on
the existing debian-control-has-obsolete-dbg-package tag?
Regards,
--
,''`.
: :' :
On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 09:18:43PM +0100, Chris Lamb wrote:
> Hi Adrian,
>
> > lintian should give an error when both foo-dbg and foo-dbgsym are
> > built
>
> Could you provide another draft description? Thank you in advance.
Both -dbg and -dbgsym are built for this package.
Only one should be b
Hi Adrian,
> lintian should give an error when both foo-dbg and foo-dbgsym are
> built
Could you provide another draft description? Thank you in advance.
Regards,
--
,''`.
: :' : Chris Lamb
`. `'` la...@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk
`-
Package: lintian
Version: 2.5.98
Severity: normal
#907362 and #907422 are examples of this problem.
Note that it is not always the -dbg that is wrong,
e.g. #907422 is a python case where the -dbgsym
are likely bogus.
6 matches
Mail list logo
