Bug#349272: lintian: understand DH_COMPAT := <level>
Package: lintian
Version: 1.23.15
Severity: minor
Tags: patch
Ran into this while fixing some older Debian Perl packages. Someone set
DH_COMPAT with:
export DH_COMPAT := 3
and lintian didn't see it. The attached patch allows an optional : before
the = for both methods of setting DH_COMPAT, since to make it means the
same thing. (?= is really a bug since something set in the environment
shouldn't change the compatibility level of the package, so I intentionally
didn't allow that case.)
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
APT prefers testing
APT policy: (990, 'testing'), (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
Kernel: Linux 2.6.12-1-686
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C (charmap=ANSI_X3.4-1968) (ignored: LC_ALL set to C)
Versions of packages lintian depends on:
ii binutils 2.16.1cvs20051214-1 The GNU assembler, linker and bina
ii diffstat 1.41-1 produces graph of changes introduc
ii dpkg-dev 1.13.11 package building tools for Debian
ii file 4.15-2 Determines file type using "magic"
ii gettext 0.14.5-2 GNU Internationalization utilities
ii intltool-debian 0.34.1+20050828 Help i18n of RFC822 compliant conf
ii libparse-debianchang 1.0-1 parse Debian changelogs and output
ii man-db 2.4.3-3 The on-line manual pager
ii perl [libdigest-md5- 5.8.7-10 Larry Wall's Practical Extraction
lintian recommends no packages.
-- no debconf information
--- lintian-1.23.15/checks/debhelper.orig 2006-01-19 06:11:59.000000000 -0800
+++ lintian-1.23.15/checks/debhelper 2006-01-21 14:30:30.000000000 -0800
@@ -93,11 +93,11 @@
$seencommand = 1;
$needbuilddepends = 1;
$needtomodifyscripts = 1;
- } elsif (/^\s*export\s+DH_COMPAT\s*=\s*(\d+)/) {
+ } elsif (/^\s*export\s+DH_COMPAT\s*:?=\s*(\d+)/) {
$needversiondepends = $1;
} elsif (/^\s*export\s+DH_COMPAT/) {
$needversiondepends = $dhcompatvalue if $dhcompatvalue;
- } elsif (/^\s*DH_COMPAT\s*=\s*(\d+)/) {
+ } elsif (/^\s*DH_COMPAT\s*:?=\s*(\d+)/) {
$dhcompatvalue = $1;
}
}
Reply to: