Bug#983539: false positive (.DEFAULT?) E: debian-rules-missing-required-target

2025-04-27 Thread John Scott
(CC'ing a...@debian.org directly in case this has been missed) I wrote an analysis on the bug last year, but in summary I believe this GNU-specific construct: %: dh $@ is equivalent to .DEFAULT: dh $@ Any makefile having a .DEFAULT rule should be exempt from this Lintian error.

Bug#983539: false positive (.DEFAULT?) E: debian-rules-missing-required-target

2024-07-29 Thread John Scott
Control: tags -1 - moreinfo On Mon, 2023-01-02 at 22:51 +0100, Axel Beckert wrote: > Control: tag -1 + moreinfo > > Hi John, > > > This package uses Debhelper. What I think causes the false positive is > > that, instead of using a pattern rule like > > %: > > dh $@ > > > > I use the .DEFAUL

Bug#999785: Bogus Lintian warning built-using-field-on-arch-all-package affects prospective package firmware-carl9170

2023-07-09 Thread John Scott
Lintian asserts that having Built-Using on an Arch: all package is always incorrect. Debian Policy permits and often requires having Built-Using on an Arch: all package. This is the situation with carl9170fw, a GPL-2.0-only-licensed binary that bakes in several static libraries that need to hav

Bug#983539: Lintian bug causes non-overridable rejection of packages

2022-12-21 Thread John Scott
Control: affects -1 ftp.debian.org This caused my package to get rejected, and Lintian overrides cannot be used to mitigate it. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Bug#983539: false positive (.DEFAULT?) E: debian-rules-missing-required-target

2021-02-25 Thread John Scott
Package: lintian Version: 2.104.0 Severity: normal I'm working on a yet-to-be-released package, binutils-sh-elf, which is a native package. I've attached the source for your examination. This package uses Debhelper. What I think causes the false positive is that, instead of using a pattern rule l