Bug#701660: lintian: Possible wrong syntax-error-in-dep5-copyright test in Lintian (Duplicate field copyright)
Package: lintian
Version: 2.5.11
Severity: minor
Correct me if I am wrong or if I lack some coffee, please, but with this
copyright file:
=====
Format: http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
Upstream-Name: name
Upstream-Contact: Somebody
Files: file1.c file2.c
Copyright: 2000, 2001 Foo
Copyright: 2001, 2002 Bar
License: BSD-Like
=====
I am seeing this:
W: test source: syntax-error-in-dep5-copyright line 7: Duplicate field copyright.
In
http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/#copyright-field
we can see an example with two "Copyright" lines.
It seems that lintian should not warn for duplicates copyright fields?
Thank you!
Best regards,
Nelson
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 7.0
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (100, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386
Kernel: Linux 3.7-trunk-amd64 (SMP w/8 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=pt_BR.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=pt_BR.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Versions of packages lintian depends on:
ii binutils 2.22-8
ii bzip2 1.0.6-4
ii diffstat 1.55-3
ii file 5.11-2
ii gettext 0.18.1.1-10
ii hardening-includes 2.3
ii intltool-debian 0.35.0+20060710.1
ii libapt-pkg-perl 0.1.26+b1
ii libarchive-zip-perl 1.30-6
ii libc-bin 2.13-38
ii libclass-accessor-perl 0.34-1
ii libclone-perl 0.31-1+b2
ii libdpkg-perl 1.16.9
ii libemail-valid-perl 0.190-1
ii libipc-run-perl 0.92-1
ii libparse-debianchangelog-perl 1.2.0-1
ii libtext-levenshtein-perl 0.06~01-2
ii libtimedate-perl 1.2000-1
ii liburi-perl 1.60-1
ii locales 2.13-38
ii man-db 2.6.3-3
ii patchutils 0.3.2-1.1
ii perl [libdigest-sha-perl] 5.14.2-18
ii t1utils 1.37-2
lintian recommends no packages.
Versions of packages lintian suggests:
pn binutils-multiarch <none>
ii dpkg-dev 1.16.9
ii libhtml-parser-perl 3.69-2
pn libperlio-gzip-perl <none>
ii libtext-template-perl 1.45-2
ii man-db 2.6.3-3
ii xz-utils [lzma] 5.1.1alpha+20120614-2
-- no debconf information
Reply to: