Julian Gilbey <j...@debian.org>: > I have come across a number of packages with a line in their > debian/rules like: > > ifeq (,$(findstring nodocs, $(DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS))) > > This should be "nodoc", according to the "nodoc" entry in > https://wiki.debian.org/BuildProfileSpec#Registered_profile_names > > It would be good to check for this error.
This mostly looks like a typo and I am kinda sure that you'd find typos like this all over many places. I am a bit unsure if checks for this is something we as a new lintian warning is something that we even need? Louis-Philippe Véronneau <po...@debian.org>: > ... > I've created a patch on Salsa that creates a new Lintian check for this. > > https://salsa.debian.org/lintian/lintian/-/merge_requests/504 And if we do -- I checked the MR and it does not look extensible. If in future there comes another class of typos, it will result in a new patch of this kind. Instead, is it possible to have a list of offending terms like this in a data list and warn the user about them via a lintian warning? For instance, we have data/fields/obsolete-packages for listing obsolete packages and showing the user about the obsolete packages and their replacements. Do you think a similar implementation for this (data/fields/bad-buildprofiles ?) makes sense? Best, Nilesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
