Bug#795955: Complex regular subexpression recursion limit in cruft.pm
Package: lintian
Version: 2.5.36.1
Severity: minor
Hi,
filling bug as requested in #debconf.
When running lintian on the source of some shady package [1]
(not in the archive), I get quite some warnings from perl:
Complex regular subexpression recursion limit (32766) exceeded at /usr/share/lintian/checks/cruft.pm line 939.
If you think this is a valid bug, feel free to fix it.
Otherwise, just close it :)
Greets
Evgeni
[1] http://pinky.die-welt.net/~evgeni/tmp/limesurvey_2.05plus-build140520%2bdfsg-1.dsc
-- System Information:
Debian Release: stretch/sid
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'stable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386
Kernel: Linux 4.1.0-2-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
Versions of packages lintian depends on:
ii binutils 2.25.1-1
ii bzip2 1.0.6-8
ii diffstat 1.60-1
ii file 1:5.22+15-2
ii gettext 0.19.5.1-1
ii hardening-includes 2.7
ii intltool-debian 0.35.0+20060710.2
ii libapt-pkg-perl 0.1.29+b2
ii libarchive-zip-perl 1.49-1
ii libclass-accessor-perl 0.34-1
ii libclone-perl 0.38-1
ii libdpkg-perl 1.18.2
ii libemail-valid-perl 1.196-1
ii libfile-basedir-perl 0.07-1
ii libipc-run-perl 0.94-1
ii liblist-moreutils-perl 0.413-1
ii libparse-debianchangelog-perl 1.2.0-5
ii libtext-levenshtein-perl 0.12-1
ii libtimedate-perl 2.3000-2
ii liburi-perl 1.69-1
ii man-db 2.7.2-1
ii patchutils 0.3.4-1
ii perl [libdigest-sha-perl] 5.20.2-6
ii t1utils 1.38-4
ii xz-utils 5.1.1alpha+20120614-2.1
Versions of packages lintian recommends:
ii dpkg 1.18.2
ii libautodie-perl 2.29-1
ii libperlio-gzip-perl 0.18-3+b1
ii perl 5.20.2-6
ii perl-modules [libautodie-perl] 5.20.2-6
Versions of packages lintian suggests:
pn binutils-multiarch <none>
ii dpkg-dev 1.18.2
ii libhtml-parser-perl 3.71-2
ii libtext-template-perl 1.46-1
ii libyaml-perl 1.13-1
-- no debconf information
Reply to: