[SCM] Debian package checker branch, master, updated. 2.2.9-49-gd848434
The following commit has been merged in the master branch:
commit b63a445e442c3eaed11f8044daeaf8934954f5ba
Author: Raphael Geissert <atomo64@gmail.com>
Date: Mon Apr 13 01:40:33 2009 -0500
Add a canary test to complement the fields-essential test
diff --git a/t/tests/cruft-general-quilt/debian/debian/control.in b/t/tests/fields-essential-yes-source/debian/debian/control.in
similarity index 72%
copy from t/tests/cruft-general-quilt/debian/debian/control.in
copy to t/tests/fields-essential-yes-source/debian/debian/control.in
index f46e04b..285ea13 100644
--- a/t/tests/cruft-general-quilt/debian/debian/control.in
+++ b/t/tests/fields-essential-yes-source/debian/debian/control.in
@@ -1,9 +1,9 @@
Source: {$srcpkg}
-Format: 3.0 (quilt)
Priority: extra
Section: {$section}
Maintainer: {$author}
Standards-Version: {$standards_version}
+Essential: yes
Build-Depends: debhelper (>= 7)
Package: {$srcpkg}
@@ -13,3 +13,7 @@ Description: {$description}
This is a test package designed to exercise some feature or tag of
Lintian. It is part of the Lintian test suite and may do very odd
things. It should not be installed like a regular package.
+ .
+ In the, unlikely, event that dpkg-gencontrol starts considering the
+ source-level Essential field this test should break so that lintian is
+ fixed accordingly.
diff --git a/t/tests/fields-essential-yes-source/desc b/t/tests/fields-essential-yes-source/desc
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..79e6ea3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/t/tests/fields-essential-yes-source/desc
@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+Testname: fields-essential-yes-source
+Sequence: 6000
+Version: 1.0
+Description: Canary test for Essential field-related checks and assumptions
+Test-Against:
+ new-essential-package
+ essential-in-source-package
diff --git a/t/debs/deb-format-record-size/tags b/t/tests/fields-essential-yes-source/tags
similarity index 100%
copy from t/debs/deb-format-record-size/tags
copy to t/tests/fields-essential-yes-source/tags
--
Debian package checker
Reply to: