> > About the execution of this change repository-wide:
> >
> > Is anyone working on feeding
> > https://salsa.debian.org/lintian/lintian/-/blob/master/data/fields/obsolete-packages
> > to https://janitor.debian.net/scrub-obsolete/ so that at least
> > Salsa-maintained packages would swiftly get on path to get this
> > dependency removed (and Salsa-CI failures stopped on this Lintian
> > error)?
>
> That's an interesting idea. The current format
> https://salsa.debian.org/lintian/lintian/-/blob/master/data/fields/obsolete-packages
> isn't super machine-readable. Perhaps it could be split into one file
> with human-readable hints, and one with straightforward replacements
> (e.g. "libtinfo-dev => libncurses-dev" )?
Related, current lintian-brush actually adds lsb-base back if it was removed:
$ lintian-brush --version
lintian-brush 0.145
$ lintian-brush --allow-reformatting --uncertain --yolo --modern
$ git show
commit a0a2bf5d6972348114b6d6d489619353c539bd74 (HEAD -> dev-otto)
Add missing dependency on lsb-base.
Changes-By: lintian-brush
Fixes: lintian: init.d-script-needs-depends-on-lsb-base
See-also:
https://lintian.debian.org/tags/init.d-script-needs-depends-on-lsb-base.html
diff --git a/debian/control b/debian/control
index 80edd7be401..240d74914d3 100644
--- a/debian/control
+++ b/debian/control
@@ -454,7 +454,8 @@ Depends: galera-4 (>= 26.4),
- ${shlibs:Depends}
+ ${shlibs:Depends},
+ lsb-base
I have only ever found two bugs in lintian-brush, otherwise it works
perfectly. I wish those who drive changes to Lintian rules would take
one extra step and also collaborate with lintian-brush to automate
fixing the issues instead of relying on all human maintainers to read
Lintian reports and address them manually.
