On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 12:14:41PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > > ...argh. unused-override is *info*-level?
> > >
> > > That explains why I didn't see it by default, but is there any
> > > particular reason for that?
> >
> > It's been that way since at least lintian 1.23 (April 2004) according
> > to git, so I imagine no-one remembers specifically why.
>
> Would there be any objection to upgrading it to a warning (not an error,
> just a warning)?
Yes, please read /usr/share/doc/lintian/lintian.txt.gz, §2.3:
Errors (E)
The displayed message indicates a policy violation or a
packaging error. For policy violations, Lintian will
cite the appropriate policy section when it is invoked
with the -i option.
Warnings (W)
The displayed message might be a policy violation or
packaging error. A warning is usually an indication that
the test is known to sometimes produce false positive
alarms, because either the corresponding rule in policy
has many exceptions or the test uses some sort of
heuristic to find errors.
Info (I)
The displayed message is meant to inform the maintainer
about a certain packaging aspect. Such messages do not
usually indicate errors, but might still be of interest
to the curious. They are not displayed unless the -I
option is set.
Pedantic (P)
The displayed message indicates a message of Lintian at
its most pickiest and include checks for particular
Debian packaging styles, checks that are very frequently
wrong, and checks that many people disagree with. They
are not displayed unless the --pedantic option is set.
Clearly I is the perfect level for that tag.
I like the proposal to have the number of unused-overrides reported in
the final summary though.
--
regards,
Mattia Rizzolo
GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18 4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540 .''`.
more about me: https://mapreri.org : :' :
Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri `. `'`
Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia `-
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature