Howdy all,
The ‘python-coverage’ source package has some special handling of build
and install rules. How can I convince the packaging tools to correctly
handle ‘/usr/lib/python3.7/dist-packages/foo.egg-info/’?
This was brought to my attention by the recent addition of the Lintian
tag “python-module-in-wrong-location”:
W: python3-coverage: python-module-in-wrong-location
usr/lib/python3.7/dist-packages/coverage-4.5.1.egg-info/
usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/coverage-4.5.1.egg-info/
N:
N: The package installs a Python module or debug information for a Python
N: module in the wrong location for the given version of Python.
N:
N: dh_python3 can be used to fix this for Python 3 modules.
N:
N: Refer to Debian Python Policy section 2.5 (Module Path) and
N: https://bugs.debian.org/576012 for details.
N:
N: Severity: normal, Certainty: possible
N:
N: Check: files, Type: binary, udeb
N:
W: python3-coverage: python-module-in-wrong-location
usr/lib/python3.7/dist-packages/coverage-4.5.1.egg-info/entry_points.txt
usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/coverage-4.5.1.egg-info/entry_points.txt
Which particular of those files are right or wrong, according to the
Debian Python Policy §2.5?
* usr/lib/python3.7/dist-packages/coverage-4.5.1.egg-info/
* usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/coverage-4.5.1.egg-info/
* usr/lib/python3.7/dist-packages/coverage-4.5.1.egg-info/entry_points.txt
* usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/coverage-4.5.1.egg-info/entry_points.txt
How should I change the package's ‘debian/rules’ to conform to Debian
Python Policy §2.5?
--
\ “I went to the hardware store and bought some used paint. It |
`\ was in the shape of a house.” —Steven Wright |
_o__) |
Ben Finney
