Re: FTBS twice - what is the priority for it?
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 22:51, Shachar Shemesh <shachar@debian.org> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I am preparing an upload to Sid, with the intent of getting it into Lenny,
> for a package of mine (to solve bug #493061 for fakeroot-ng, if it matters).
> While working on it, I found out that the package also has a FTBS twice bug,
> which resulted from empty lines (with no leading tab character) in
> debian/rules in the clean target. My question is - what to do?
>
> Do I open a FTBS twice bug for the package and upload the fix? If so, what
> priority should the new bug be? I saw FTBS bugs ranging from "wishlist" to
> "important". I don't think it is an actual policy violation (am I wrong? Can
> someone point me to the relevant section?)
>
> Alternatively, as the delta has only white spaces between fixing the tabs
> and not fixing it, I can just put the fix in and hope the release managers
> (hi!) don't catch me when I ask them to allow the fix for 493061 through.
>
> Then again, if the bug is not important enough, I can upload a fix that only
> handles 493061, and doesn't touch the double FTBS bug at all.
>
> What should I do?
>
> Shachar
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
> listmaster@lists.debian.org
>
>
It is actually a policy violation; Section 4.9 states:
clean
This must undo any effects that the build and binary targets may
have had, except that it should leave alone any output files created
in the parent directory by a run of a binary target.
--
/Carl Fürstenberg <azatoth@gmail.com>
Reply to: