Sune Vuorela <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Latest, the warning about quilt patches without any description. Sure it > is nice to have a description, but I don't need lintian to tell it.
This is severity: minor, certainty: certain, which currently *barely* makes the W threshold. I think a very good argument could be made that this is actually severity: wishlist, which would downgrade it to an I. I'm copying debian-lint-maint to see what the other Lintian maintainers think. I do think the warning is correct for a lint program, and it sounds like you do agree that this is something that should be improved about the package. The prioritization just may be off. > and in other words, the latest package I uploaded: > > $ lintian kdebase_3.5.9.dfsg.1-6_i386.changes | wc --lines && lintian > kdebase_3.5.9.dfsg.1-6_i386.changes | tail -1 > 142 > N: 58 tags overridden (32 errors, 26 warnings) http://lintian.debian.org/full/[EMAIL PROTECTED] Much of this is just more of the desktop file fiasco, since KDE doesn't follow what's supposedly a shared standard. I've complained about that at some length before and don't know what people are supposed to do with desktop files. If anyone from the KDE team is willing to propose patches or even concrete actionable changes to how Lintian checks desktop files so that KDE's desktop files don't produce tons of noise, I'd love to hear them. You don't have man pages for many of your programs, as you've noted, which is pile of warnings. You install libraries into /usr/lib in a bunch of packages without shlibs entries and don't call ldconfig in postinst. Hm, and you override that in a few places. In general, just looking at the Lintian report, I don't understand what you're doing with shared libraries and why it's correct. Lintian thinks it's wrong, and I understand why Lintian thinks it's wrong, but I must be missing something (which Lintian is also missing). You're apparently not using detached symbols for your debugging libraries, which is another small pile of warnings. By and large, apart from the desktop mess and whatever is going on with shared libraries that I don't understand, the Lintian report looks like a lot of work that should ideally be done on the packages. I'm not really seeing stuff that's obviously wrong, although I only looked at it cursorily. > You are most welcome to join in and help fixing issues and especially > writing manpages. and then, there is the ~1500 open bug reports. You have a huge and difficult-to-package piece of software and inadequate resources to do all the work on it that should ideally be done. I get that, and I'm not criticizing what you're doing. But I don't think that Lintian should stay silent about issues just because there isn't enough time to correct them. It shouldn't complain about things that aren't actually issues, but it should complain about the things that need to be fixed, even if they can't be fixed right away. That's what it's for. Not having a man page for a binary is a Policy violation. If Lintian doesn't complain about Policy violations, it's hard to understand what the point of it would be. There's a reason why that's a warning and not an error, though. :) > Please stop making the lives for the developers harder. Especially the > idea about automatically rejecting based on lintian. The only thing that's been seriously discussed with an eye to implementation, so far as I know, is to automatically reject on the basis of a hand-selected and very limited subset of Lintian tags, which would probably not affect anything that you're doing and which would certainly not automatically block packages with proper overrides. I don't think this is going to hurt you as much as you think it would. -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]