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

Bug#319938: Error on debian-control-with-duplicate-fields



Package: lintian
Version: 1.23.10
Severity: normal
File: /usr/bin/lintian

I'm the maintainer of lksctp-tools. The debian/control file has amongst
others two binary packages named lksctp-tools and lksctp-tools-doc. Running
lintian gives me the following error messages:

N: Processing source package lksctp-tools (version 1.0.2-3) ...
E: lksctp-tools source: debian-control-with-duplicate-fields package:51, 74
E: lksctp-tools source: debian-control-with-duplicate-fields section:52, 75
E: lksctp-tools source: debian-control-with-duplicate-fields priority:53, 76
E: lksctp-tools source: debian-control-with-duplicate-fields
architecture: 54, 77
E: lksctp-tools source: debian-control-with-duplicate-fields
description: 56, 78

Obviously lintian believes that lksctp-tools and lksctp-tools-doc are
the same binary package. Maybe it gets confused by the hyphen. Older
versions of lintian didn't show this behaviour.

-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (499, 'experimental')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Shell:  /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
Kernel: Linux 2.6.12.2
Locale: LANG=de_DE.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=de_DE.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)

Versions of packages lintian depends on:
ii  binutils                   2.16.1-2      The GNU assembler, linker
and bina
ii  diffstat                   1.39-1        produces graph of changes
introduc
ii  file                       4.12-1        Determines file type using
"magic"
ii  gettext                    0.14.5-2      GNU Internationalization
utilities
ii  intltool-debian            0.30+20040213 Help i18n of RFC822
compliant conf
ii  man-db                     2.4.3-1       The on-line manual pager
ii  perl [libdigest-md5-perl]  5.8.7-4       Larry Wall's Practical
Extraction

lintian recommends no packages.

-- no debconf information

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Reply to: