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

Bug#618001: lintian: maintainer-script-lacks-debhelper-token is sometimes not reported when it should



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

tags 618001 + unreproducible
thanks

On 2011-03-13 10:57, Raphaël Hertzog wrote:
> Package: lintian
> Version: 2.5.0~rc1
> Severity: normal
> 
> I'm building libapache2-mod-qos_9.54-1.dsc. When I do a full build I get
> this:
> $ debuild
> [...]
> Now running lintian...
> N: 1 tag overridden (1 error)
> Finished running lintian.
> 
> When I do a source-only build I get this:
> $ debuild -S
> [...]
> Now running lintian...
> W: libapache2-mod-qos source: maintainer-script-lacks-debhelper-token debian/libapache2-mod-qos.postinst
> W: libapache2-mod-qos source: maintainer-script-lacks-debhelper-token debian/libapache2-mod-qos.prerm
> Finished running lintian.
> 
> This is obviously not normal.
> 

Hi

I cannot reproduce the warnings when using debuild -S (-us -uc) on the
version of this package in unstable with the lintian from git.
Admittedly I have not tried to combine this with a full build.

~Niels
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
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=7RXi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



Reply to: