Re: Lintian based autorejects

[Goswin von Brederlow <goswin-v-b@web.de>]

Brian May <bam@snoopy.debian.net> writes:

> On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 02:57:35PM +0000, Simon McVittie wrote:
>>     - statically-linked-binary
>
> This is not always a bug. e.g. dar-static is supposed to be statically linked!
>
> My packages produce a number of lintian errors/warnings that I don't consider
> to be a problem (like this one) - it would be good if there was a tool I could
> use to automatically compare the output of lintian with the list documented
> here so I can find out what problems I might have without making a useless
> upload.

(in cases like this) Why?

The lintian case is not buggy, your package is not buggy. Nothing
about this is going to change. This is just a special circumstance
where statically linked binary is what is specifically intended and an
override is in order.

You (the impersonal you) not fixing lintian warnings on packages is
why a reject based on them is being done. If everyone would fix, or
where appropriate, the warnings then there would be no reason to
reject based on them. So why not fix the bugs instead of worrying
which bugs will cause a reject and which merely a bugreport by
someone?

Just my 2c,
        Goswin