Re: Problem with manpages alias
On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 12:09:20AM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > Le Mon, Mar 03, 2003 at 12:09:56PM -0800, Micah Anderson ?crivait: > > Hello, I sent the following to the manages alias and it bounced back with > > the following error... might want to get this fixed, or should I be sending > > mail to another address? I have another package to remove from the needs > > manpage list. > > This does mean that the alias "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" doesn't exist and > that the mail has been treated by the default fallback program (which is > mia-record). > > The correct alias is [EMAIL PROTECTED] (as documented) ... > > Maybe we should setup a second alias for convenience. I agree. Done. > > > Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2003 19:57:14 -0800 > > > From: Micah Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: Remove mutt-utf8 from list > > > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > mutt-utf8 is listed on http://qa-debian.org/man-pages.html as not having > > > the > > > man page for the binary "mutt". This should be removed from the page > > > because > > > the man page for this package is included in the dependant package "mutt". > > > You don't install mutt-utf without getting the "mutt" package, which > > > includes the mutt man page, this is how it is intended, and should be > > > removed from the list of binaries which need man pages. http://qa.debian.org/man-pages.html is generated based on the regular lintian reports at http://lintian.debian.org/. This is a lintian false positive, and probably one that can't be worked around in lintian. However, if the maintainer of mutt-utf8 would add a lintian override for that error, it would disappear from the QA web pages automatically. I've cc'ed Marco to see what he thinks. Cheers, -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Problem with manpages alias
[ Copy to debian-qa for information ] Le Mon, Mar 03, 2003 at 12:09:56PM -0800, Micah Anderson écrivait: > Hello, I sent the following to the manages alias and it bounced back with > the following error... might want to get this fixed, or should I be sending > mail to another address? I have another package to remove from the needs > manpage list. This does mean that the alias "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" doesn't exist and that the mail has been treated by the default fallback program (which is mia-record). The correct alias is [EMAIL PROTECTED] (as documented) ... Maybe we should setup a second alias for convenience. BTW, this had nothing to do with the PTS. Cheers, > > From: Mail Delivery System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender > > Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 04:57:21 +0100 > > > > This message was created automatically by mail delivery software (Exim). > > > > A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its > > recipients. This is a permanent error. The following address(es) failed: > > > > pipe to |/org/qa.debian.org/mia/mia-record > > generated by [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Child process of address_pipe transport returned 1 from command: > > /org/qa.debian.org/mia/mia-record > > > > The following text was generated during the delivery attempt: > > > > -- pipe to |/org/qa.debian.org/mia/mia-record > >generated by [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- > > > > No such user > > > > -- This is a copy of the message, including all the headers. -- > > > > Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Received: from mars.riseup.net [216.162.217.191] > > by klecker.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) > > id 18ph4p-00036Z-00; Mon, 03 Mar 2003 04:57:20 +0100 > > Received: by mars.riseup.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) > > id 40C2A44C04C; Sun, 2 Mar 2003 19:57:14 -0800 (PST) > > Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2003 19:57:14 -0800 > > From: Micah Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Remove mutt-utf8 from list > > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Mime-Version: 1.0 > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > Content-Disposition: inline > > > > mutt-utf8 is listed on http://qa-debian.org/man-pages.html as not having the > > man page for the binary "mutt". This should be removed from the page because > > the man page for this package is included in the dependant package "mutt". > > You don't install mutt-utf without getting the "mutt" package, which > > includes the mutt man page, this is how it is intended, and should be > > removed from the list of binaries which need man pages. > > > > Micah > > > > > > - End forwarded message - -- Raphaël Hertzog -+- http://www.ouaza.com Formation Linux et logiciel libre : http://www.logidee.com
