Bug#993645: marked as done (lintian: False positive "unknown-runtime-tests-field Architecture")
Your message dated Wed, 8 Sep 2021 04:02:03 -0700
with message-id <CAFHYt55BVsjcp39kD2RUEZKO63fDOr-C1Znvu2VznzT=DRhxtA@mail.gmail.com>
and subject line Re: Bug#993645: lintian: False positive "unknown-runtime-tests-field Architecture"
has caused the Debian Bug report #993645,
regarding lintian: False positive "unknown-runtime-tests-field Architecture"
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)
--
993645: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=993645
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: lintian
Version: 2.104.0
Severity: normal
Hi,
"Architecture" is a valid field for debian/tests/control, however
lintian reports:
P: node-glob source: unknown-runtime-tests-field Architecture in line 10
Cheers,
Yadd
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Yadd,
On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 11:51 PM Yadd <yadd@debian.org> wrote:
>
> P: node-glob source: unknown-runtime-tests-field Architecture in line 10
I do not see this hint with 2.105.0:
➤ bin/lintian /mirror/debian/pool/main/n/node-glob/node-glob_7.1.7+\~cs7.5.19-2.dsc
X: node-glob source: debian-watch-does-not-check-gpg-signature
➤ bin/lintian /mirror/debian/pool/main/n/node-glob/node-glob_7.1.6+\~7.1.3-1.dsc
X: node-glob source: debian-watch-does-not-check-gpg-signature
This bug also seems the same as Bug#977976, which was fixed in here:
https://salsa.debian.org/lintian/lintian/-/commit/6deb0513c01632f6a10747038a97f8c37e107213
Closing this bug. Please reopen if the action was taken in error. Thanks!
Kind regards
Felix Lechner
--- End Message ---
Reply to: