[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: The wider implications of stuffing the NEW queue with issues it was not designed for.

On 2009-07-23, Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 07:12:57AM +0000, Philipp Kern wrote:
>> On 2009-07-19, Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org> wrote:
>> > Do we have evidence that maintainers have damaged the project in the past by
>> > willingfully upload packages with overriden lintian errors?
>> Damaged the project... no.  Caused a RC bug to be overlooked... yes.
>> I recently encountered a package where the library's binary package
>> was not named after the SONAME.  This caused a lintian error which was...
>> overridden.  And it broke horribly when the SONAME change went unnoticed
>> because... well... the binary was never named after the SONAME and thus
>> the check wasn't active anymore.
> Lintian's error on soname mismatches references both the binary package
> name, and what lintian thinks the package name should be based on the actual
> soname.  AFAIK you can only override lintian errors by spelling them out
> fully, so surely the lintian error should have reappeared in this case as
> soon as the soname changed?

That would have prevented this indeed.  But it looks that it did not work
that way because the only override present was this one:

libbotan1.8: package-name-doesnt-match-sonames

This obviously didn't need changing.  According to [0] there was also no
other Lintian warning.

Kind regards,
Philipp Kern

[0] http://lintian.debian.org/maintainer/daniel@debian.org.html#botan-devel

Reply to: