Re: LFS status, and enabling it opportunistically on next SONAME bump
On Tue, 2015-07-21 at 19:00:18 +0200, Niels Thykier wrote:
> The tag being experimental is orthogonal to its severity. If you are
> interested in seeing it become a non-experimental tag, I can recommend
> having a look at writing a patch for #787853. From memory, the
> information needed is already collected. It just need to be used (bonus
> for a test case too).
Thanks to Sebastian for preparing a patch!
> As for the severity: Surely, it could be bumped, but given it is not a
> tag people can always trivially fix (possibly breaking ABI is not my
> definition of "trivial"), I am not necessarily convince it is in our
> best interest to be very loud with this tag. That said, I can be
> convinced otherwise as long as it does *not* lead to """blindly "fixed"
> lintian tag syndrome""".
Perhaps it could be bumped for binary packages that do not contain any
shared library, but I'm assuming that is not currently possible(?).
In any case, even packages that do not trigger the lintian warning are
not guaranteed to be LFS-safe, this needs either testing or code review.