Re: [PATCH] Nuke a few easily Lintian warnings
On Tue, 2010-08-17 at 13:18 +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 07:41:47AM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > dbg-package-missing-depends
> > Add dependency on the corresponding linux-image package to each
> > -dbg package. It's possible this is not appropriate for a kernel
> > -dbg in which case I could make it an override instead.
>
> No, the debug files have no dependency on the real package.
OK, will add an override instead.
> > Shall I apply? I guess if so then something similar ought to go into
> > trunk (I was looking at the sid branch)
>
> Please start with trunk.
OK.
>
> > --- a/linux-2.6/debian/bin/gencontrol.py
> > +++ b/linux-2.6/debian/bin/gencontrol.py
> > - extra['headers_arch_depends'] = packages_headers_arch[-1]['Depends'] = PackageRelation()
> > + packages_headers_arch[-1]['Depends'].extend(PackageRelation())
> > + extra['headers_arch_depends'] = packages_headers_arch[-1]['Depends']
>
> What is this supposed to do?
It causes us to augment rather than replace the Depends specified in the
debian/template/control.blah.in (I forget exactly which one, I think one
of the arch specific linux-headers ones). Without this one of the
Depends additions below had no effect.
> > --- a/linux-2.6/debian/templates/control.headers.arch.in
> > +++ b/linux-2.6/debian/templates/control.headers.arch.in
> > @@ -1,13 +1,14 @@
> > Package: linux-headers-@upstreamversion@@abiname@-all
> > -Depends: linux-headers-@upstreamversion@@abiname@-all-${kernel:Arch} (= ${binary:Version})
> > +Depends: linux-headers-@upstreamversion@@abiname@-all-${kernel:Arch} (= ${binary:Version}), ${misc:Depends}
>
> This is weird, this package does not even use debconf.
The requirement for ${misc:Depends} relates to the source package using
debhelper, not the binary package using debconf.
(this comment applies to all your subsequent comments too).
Ian.
--
Ian Campbell
Current Noise: Katatonia - Omerta
No woman can endure a gambling husband, unless he is a steady winner.
-- Lord Thomas Dewar
Reply to: