[SCM] Debian package checker branch, master, updated. 2.2.15-17-gfc103fa
The following commit has been merged in the master branch:
commit fc103fad338f6166c23187dd30508f74c88dbf9c
Author: Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org>
Date: Fri Sep 18 13:54:02 2009 -0700
Exclude examples from doc-base registration
* checks/menus{,.desc}:
+ [RA] Exclude examples from documentation that may require doc-base
registration. Thanks, Mikhail Gusarov. (Closes: #547345)
diff --git a/checks/menus b/checks/menus
index b199250..bbc185b 100644
--- a/checks/menus
+++ b/checks/menus
@@ -146,7 +146,8 @@ for my $file (sort keys %{$info->index}) {
unless $menumethod_includes_menu_h or $pkg eq 'menu';
}
# package doc dir?
- elsif ($file =~ m,^usr/share/doc/(.+\.(?:html|pdf))(?:\.gz)?$,) {
+ elsif ($file =~ m,^usr/share/doc/(.+\.(?:html|pdf))(?:\.gz)?$,
+ and $file !~ /examples/) {
my $name = $1;
unless ($name =~ /^changelog\.html$/ or $name =~ /^README[.-]/) {
$documentation = 1;
diff --git a/checks/menus.desc b/checks/menus.desc
index bff2bea..7ff49a8 100644
--- a/checks/menus.desc
+++ b/checks/menus.desc
@@ -357,5 +357,6 @@ Severity: wishlist
Certainty: possible
Info: The package ships a <tt>.html</tt> or <tt>.pdf</tt> file under
<tt>/usr/share/doc/</tt>, which are usually documentation, but it does
- not register anything in doc-base.
+ not register anything in doc-base. (Files under an <tt>examples</tt>
+ directory are excluded.)
Ref: policy 9.10
diff --git a/debian/changelog b/debian/changelog
index a9632a4..4005086 100755
--- a/debian/changelog
+++ b/debian/changelog
@@ -17,6 +17,9 @@ lintian (2.2.16) UNRELEASED; urgency=low
packages. Patch from Raphael Geissert. (Closes: #527363)
+ [RA] Fix regex for recognizing CVS repositories available via
anonymous ssh. Thanks, Thorsten Glaser. (Closes: #546927)
+ * checks/menus{,.desc}:
+ + [RA] Exclude examples from documentation that may require doc-base
+ registration. Thanks, Mikhail Gusarov. (Closes: #547345)
* lib/Spelling.pm:
+ [RA] Additional spelling corrections from Raphael Geissert.
--
Debian package checker
Reply to: