Hi, On 30/01/23 at 21:58 +0100, Francesco Poli wrote: > On Mon, 30 Jan 2023 21:14:53 +0100 Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > > > Hi Francesco, > > Hi Lucas! :-) > > > > > On 30/01/23 at 20:45 +0100, Francesco Poli (wintermute) wrote: > [...] > > > Why is UDD outdated w.r.t. the lintian version? > > > Shouldn't UDD be aware of the version currently in testing, or maybe > > > even in unstable? > [...] > > > > The update to a newer lintian version on the UDD lintian worker is a > > manual process. > > Ah, I wasn't aware of that.
The reason is that it takes a few days to update the data, so it's better to make an informed decision about it and not do it for releases that are going to be superseded soon anyway. > > I'll do that soon, but I have some other Debian stuff > > queued up that looks more important. > > Any reason in particular you need the latest version? > > Well, one reason is that lintian/2.115.3 is incorrectly complaining > about [many packages], stating that they declare compatibility with a > non-existing Debian Policy version. > This obviously happens, because a new Policy version (4.6.2) has been > released after lintian/2.115.3, and all the updated packages are seen > by lintian/2.115.3 as wrong... > > [many packages]: > <https://udd.debian.org/lintian-tag.cgi?tag=newer-standards-version> I updated lintian on the worker. The results will get updated over the next few days (probably 3 to 5 days). Progress can be checked using, for example: udd=> select lintian_version, count(distinct(source,version,package,package_version,architecture)) from lintian_logs group by lintian_version; lintian_version | count -----------------+-------- 2.115.3 | 365203 <- that needs to get to 0 2.116.2 | 224 (2 rows) I'll check again in a few days and close when the data is migrated. Lucas
