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

Bug#468362: lintian: [checks/scripts] fails to find zsh interpreter dependency



Package: lintian
Version: 1.23.45
Severity: normal

Hi,

lintian tells me:

 E: draai: missing-dep-for-interpreter zsh => zsh (./usr/bin/draai)

while /usr/bin/draai has

 #! /bin/zsh

and my Depends: line has

 zsh | zsh-beta

.  This seems a false positive to me.  I've tried to write a patch,
perhaps changing

     zsh            => [ '/bin' ],

in

     zsh            => [ '/bin', 'zsh | zsh-beta' ],

in /usr/share/lintian/checks/scripts fixes it.  FWIW, the zomg (0.3.9-1)
package suffers from the same bug, see
http://lintian.debian.org/reports/maintainer/schizo@debian.org.html#zomg
.

Thanks a lot for maintaining lintian!

Bye,

Joost

-- System Information:
Debian Release: lenny/sid
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'stable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)

Kernel: Linux 2.6.24-1-686 (SMP w/1 CPU core)
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash

Versions of packages lintian depends on:
ii  binutils            2.18.1~cvs20080103-1 The GNU assembler, linker and bina
ii  diffstat            1.45-2               produces graph of changes introduc
ii  dpkg-dev            1.14.16.6            package building tools for Debian
ii  file                4.23-2               Determines file type using "magic"
ii  gettext             0.17-2               GNU Internationalization utilities
ii  intltool-debian     0.35.0+20060710.1    Help i18n of RFC822 compliant conf
ii  libparse-debianchan 1.1.1-2              parse Debian changelogs and output
ii  liburi-perl         1.35.dfsg.1-1        Manipulates and accesses URI strin
ii  man-db              2.5.1-2              on-line manual pager
ii  perl [libdigest-md5 5.8.8-12             Larry Wall's Practical Extraction 

lintian recommends no packages.

-- no debconf information

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: