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

Re: Better Lintian checks

On 2016-01-26 12:10, Jakub Wilk wrote:
* Sebastiaan Couwenberg <sebastic@xs4all.nl>, 2016-01-26, 07:45:
The use of Multi-Arch: no was suggested by


The wording is unfortunate.

You should not add "Multi-Arch: no" to the control file, but instead
remove the field, because "no" is the default.

The gdal package didn't have any Multi-Arch control fields.

And most of the time changing multi-archness isn't the correct course
of action anyway...

Yeah, Bastiens reference to the suggestion for the general old-style-config-script tag should be the way forward.

I just don't have time to fix all reverse dependencies, so I'd like to keep including gdal-config for the time being.

The reject message

Quoting the reject message would have been helpful...
I guess you're referring to this:

I quoted most of the reject message except the bug number.

The reject in question is here:


The speed at which it arrived suggests that it's an auto reject, despite Bastien saying that it's not.

refers to #768353 which was fixed in November 2014, but the fix is most likely not available in stable yet,

The version graph says it's fixed in "dose3/3.3~beta1-3 (stable)".

Thanks for the feedback, unfortunately no solution yet.

Kind Regards,


Reply to: