Hi Sven, On Thursday 03 September 2009 09:31:19 Sven Joachim wrote: > found 532022 5.7+20090607-1 > retitle 532022 libncursesw5-dbg: does not ship detached debugging symbols > severity 532022 normal > thanks > > On 2009-06-05 21:32 +0200, Raphael Geissert wrote: > > Package: libncursesw5-dbg > > Version: 5.7+20090523-1 > > Severity: grave > > I disagree with the severity, as explained below.
Looks like I forgot to close this bug report some time ago, and it got "fixed" when there was actually nothing to fix. > > > $ dpkg -L libncursesw5-dbg > > [...] > > /usr/lib/debug/libticw.so.5.7 > > /usr/lib/debug/libformw.so.5.7 > > /usr/lib/debug/libpanelw.so.5.7 > > /usr/lib/debug/libncursesw.so.5.7 > > /usr/lib/debug/libmenuw.so.5.7 > > /usr/lib/debug/libmenuw.so.5 > > /usr/lib/debug/libpanelw.so.5 > > /usr/lib/debug/libticw.so.5 > > /usr/lib/debug/libformw.so.5 > > /usr/lib/debug/libncursesw.so.5 > > > > But the shlibs are installed in /lib/, not in /; so the files > > in /usr/lib/debug should be moved to /usr/lib/debug/*lib*/ > > No, and had the maintainer looked at the lintian warnings and errors¹, he > would not have done that. These files are not detached debugging > symbols, but rather a debug version of the library, built with different > options (which, due to a packaging mistake, causes interesting problems > like #365120²). You are right. I even wrote the debug-symbols-directly-in-usr-lib-debug lintian check right after I filed the report. Had ncurses indeed be bogus that tag would have been emitted. Thanks for pointing that out. Cheers, -- Raphael Geissert - Debian Developer www.debian.org - get.debian.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qa-packages-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
