Re: Lintian complaints for qemu-fast
On Tue, Mar 16, 2004 at 03:24:03AM +0100, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 16, 2004 at 02:28:19AM +0100, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
> > Bold suggestion: what about getting the overrides-responsibility towards
> > lintian, and not the packages... of course, for backwards compatibility
> > and to cope with impatiant maintainers, the current way should keep
> > working, only emitting a I: about getting lintian-maintainers to add the
> > override to lintian... Noticing bad tests becomes easier then too.
>
> ohh, come on. In unstable we have currently about 800 override files
> (and we haven't even implemented overrides for source packages!)
> _I_ don't want to maintain these files and check for every new upload
> if the overrides are still needed. Adding additional redirections
> normally don't provides better accuracy... Let's just don't do it, okay?
I agree. This seems like a retrograde step: it was *good* when overrides
were pushed out to packages after originally having been maintained in
lintian.
--
Colin Watson [cjwatson@flatline.org.uk]
Reply to: