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

Bug#734332: marked as done (lintian: ruby-script-bug-no-ruby-dep incorrectly reported for racc 1.4.9-1)

Your message dated Sat, 12 Apr 2014 14:00:07 +0200
with message-id <20140412120007.GA2917@sx.home.zeha.at>
and subject line Re: Bug#734332: lintian: ruby-script-bug-no-ruby-dep incorrectly reported for racc 1.4.9-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #734332,
regarding lintian: ruby-script-bug-no-ruby-dep incorrectly reported for racc 1.4.9-1
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
734332: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=734332
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: lintian
Version: 2.5.20
Severity: normal

Dear lintian maintainers,

lintian.d.o reports[1] racc 1.4.9-1 as having the error
"ruby-script-but-no-ruby-dep", however the package correctly depends on
ruby | ruby-interpreter:

% apt-cache show racc
Package: racc
Version: 1.4.9-1
Depends: ruby | ruby-interpreter

I fail to see why the check applies here. The only interesting thing I
see is that racc *only* has this one dependency.

Thank you,
Christian

[1] http://lintian.debian.org/full/pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org.html#racc_1.4.9-1

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
So this is not a bug, and therefore it should be closed.

-- 
 ,''`.  Christian Hofstaedtler <zeha@debian.org>
: :' :  Debian Developer
`. `'   7D1A CFFA D9E0 806C 9C4C  D392 5C13 D6DB 9305 2E03
  `-

--- End Message ---
Reply to: