Jeremy Bícha <jeremy.bi...@canonical.com> writes: > On Sun, Jan 26, 2025 at 6:28 AM Ahmad Khalifa <ah...@khalifa.ws> wrote:
>> The lintian error is a great heads-up and it's up to the reader to >> decide whether it's a true error to fix or a false-positive to >> override. > I have never seen this Lintian error actually be useful. I think an > error is far too strong for this; I think even a warning is too strong; > maybe info would be ok. When we introduced it many years ago, it was definitely useful. It's intended to catch plugin libraries that are linked with the main library but not with libc explicitly, while still using libc symbols. This case often works due to the implicit dependency up until it doesn't. Maybe the tooling is now better in ways that make this much less likely to happen? And maybe it's more common these days to have plugin libraries that aren't linked with libc? Back in the day, it was very rare for people to successfully manage to write code that never called a libc symbol. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <https://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
