As the previous package of 4.7.2-0.1 has now been migrated, My package should be ready, we ok to get that uploaded
Also, in the future, can we amend the control file, such that the Maintainer field is a mailing list, and the Uploaders field is a list of people that can upload a package? I've seen this on some packages, so would be great for any advice on this regards, Arif On Sun, 14 Jul 2024 at 21:30, Phil Wyett <philip.wy...@kathenas.org> wrote: > On Sun, 2024-07-14 at 21:22 +0100, Arif Ali wrote: > > Phil, > > > > Yup, England games can always be stressful; c'mon England ;) > > > > I ran lintian before I submitted as per your instructions in the > previous upload to mentos; and below was my output. > > > > Things that didn't come in the output > > * Date issue; I would have resolved the date issue before submitting > > * Spelling mistake in changelog: again would have resolved before > submitting > > * man page issues; this appears after package upload, and you seem to > get it, but my output doesn't show it > > > > I am running the relevant tests on sid, do I need to install more than > just lintian and the CLI arguments you recommended > > > > root@sos-avocado-sid:~# cat lintian-dsc.log > > N: > > W: sosreport source: newer-standards-version 4.7.0 (current is 4.6.2) > > N: > > N: The source package refers to a Standards-Version which is newer > than the > > N: highest one Lintian is programmed to check. > > N: > > N: If the source package is correct, please upgrade Lintian to the > newest > > N: version. > > N: > > N: Visibility: warning > > N: Show-Always: no > > N: Check: fields/standards-version > > N: > > N: > > P: sosreport source: spelling-error-in-patch-description immediatelly > immediately [debian/patches/0003_man-sos-report.patch] > > N: > > N: Lintian found a spelling, grammar or capitalization error in the > > N: description for this patch. Lintian has a list of common > misspellings that > > N: it looks for. It does not have a dictionary like a spelling checker > does. > > N: > > N: Patch filenames or descriptions that refer to "spelling" or "typo" > (or > > N: similar) are ignored by Lintian. > > N: > > N: Visibility: pedantic > > N: Show-Always: no > > N: Check: debian/patches/quilt > > N: > > N: > > X: sosreport source: debian-watch-does-not-check-openpgp-signature > [debian/watch] > > N: > > N: This watch file does not specify a means to verify the upstream > tarball > > N: using a cryptographic signature. > > N: > > N: If upstream distributions provides such signatures, please use the > > N: pgpsigurlmangle options in this watch file's opts= to generate the > URL of > > N: an upstream OpenPGP signature. This signature is automatically > downloaded > > N: and verified against a keyring stored in > debian/upstream/signing-key.asc > > N: > > N: Of course, not all upstreams provide such signatures but you could > request > > N: them as a way of verifying that no third party has modified the > code after > > N: its release (projects such as phpmyadmin, unrealircd, and proftpd > have > > N: suffered from this kind of attack). > > N: > > N: Please refer to the uscan(1) manual page for details. > > N: > > N: Visibility: pedantic > > N: Show-Always: no > > N: Check: debian/watch > > N: Renamed from: debian-watch-does-not-check-gpg-signature > > N: debian-watch-may-check-gpg-signature > > N: This tag is experimental. > > N: > > N: > > X: sosreport source: prefer-uscan-symlink filenamemangle > s%(?:.*?)?v?(\d[\d.]*)\.tar\.gz%sos-$1.tar.gz% [debian/watch:4] > > N: > > N: Please consider setting USCAN_SYMLINK=rename in your ~/.devscripts > > N: configuration file instead of using the option filenamemangle in > > N: debian/watch. > > N: > > N: Please check with your team before making changes to sources you > maintain > > N: together. There are circumstances when the filenamemangle option is > > N: better. > > N: > > N: Please refer to the uscan(1) manual page for details. > > N: > > N: Visibility: pedantic > > N: Show-Always: no > > N: Check: debian/watch > > N: This tag is experimental. > > N: > > N: > > X: sosreport source: upstream-metadata-file-is-missing > > N: > > N: This source package is not Debian-native but it does not have a > > N: debian/upstream/metadata file. > > N: > > N: The Upstream MEtadata GAthered with YAml (UMEGAYA) project is an > effort to > > N: collect meta-information about upstream projects from any source > package. > > N: This file is in YAML format and it is used in to feed the data in > the > > N: UltimateDebianDatabase. For example, it can contains the way the > authors > > N: want their software be cited in publications and some bibliographic > > N: references about the software. > > N: > > N: Please add a debian/upstream/metadata file. > > N: > > N: Please refer to https://dep-team.pages.debian.net/deps/dep12/ and > > N: https://wiki.debian.org/UpstreamMetadata for details. > > N: > > N: Visibility: pedantic > > N: Show-Always: no > > N: Check: debian/upstream/metadata > > N: This tag is experimental. > > N: > > N: > > X: sosreport source: very-long-line-length-in-source-file 1039 > 512 > [tests/report_tests/plugin_tests/juju/agent.conf:188] > > N: > > N: The source file includes a line length that is well beyond the > normally > > N: human made code line length. > > N: > > N: This very long line length does not allow Lintian to do correctly > some > > N: source file checks. > > N: > > N: This line could also be the result of some text injected by a > computer > > N: program, and thus could lead to FTBFS bugs. > > N: > > N: Last but not least, long line in source code could be used to > obfuscate > > N: the source code and to hide stuff like backdoors or security > problems. > > N: > > N: It could be due to jslint source comments or other build tool > comments. > > N: > > N: You may report this issue upstream. > > N: > > N: Visibility: pedantic > > N: Show-Always: no > > N: Check: files/contents/line-length > > N: Renamed from: insane-line-length-in-source-file > > N: This tag is experimental. > > N: > > N: Screen: autotools/long-lines > > N: Advocates: "Russ Allbery" <r...@debian.org> > > N: Reason: > > N: Upstream sources using autoconf have traditionally been > > N: distributed with generated ./configure scripts as well as > > N: other third-party m4 macro files such as libtool. > > N: > > N: When paired with automake, there may also be some > intermediate > > N: Makefile.in files. > > N: > > N: A lot of sources potentially contain such files, but they > are > > N: not actionable by either the Debian distributor or by the > > N: upstream maintainer. > > N: > > N: As a side note, modern Debian build protocols will > re-create > > N: many of those files via dh_autoreconf. They are present > merely > > N: to aid in bootstrapping systems where the GNU suite may > not yet > > N: be available. > > N: > > N: Read more in Bug#996740. > > N: > > N: > > X: sosreport source: very-long-line-length-in-source-file 2374 > 512 > [tests/report_tests/plugin_tests/curtin/curtin-install.log:883] > > > > Thanks in advance > > Arif > > Arif, > > Many tags are 'experimental' and I tend to ignore them and not be picky. > You > are running all the right tests and you are a stage where you can pick off > little things as part of future maintenance. > > Regards > > Phil > > -- > > "I play the game for the game’s own sake" > > Arthur Conan Doyle - The Adventure of the Bruce-Partington Plans > > -- > > Internet Relay Chat (IRC): kathenas > > Website: https://kathenas.org > > Instagram: https://instagram.com/kathenasorg/ > > Buy Me A Coffee: https://buymeacoffee.com/kathenasorg > > -- > >
