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

Bug#671084: marked as done (lintian: warn against ~dfsg versions)

Your message dated Mon, 14 Jan 2019 23:43:27 +0000
with message-id <1547509407.123992.1634641512.5F81E424@webmail.messagingengine.com>
and subject line Re: Bug#671084: lintian: warn against ~dfsg versions
has caused the Debian Bug report #671084,
regarding lintian: warn against ~dfsg versions
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.)


-- 
671084: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=671084
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: lintian
Version: 2.5.6
Severity: wishlist

I've recently noticed a few instances of packages being assigned
versions of something like 1.2~dfsg-3.  That doesn't make sense: the ~
character is supposed to be for marking pre-release version tags from
upstream like ~beta2, while the "dfsg" tag means it's a repack of the
upstream release to remove non-free files.  The two conflict with each
other.  So it would be nice if Lintian would flag this as a probable
error, and suggest using "1.2+dfsg-3" instead.

According to my quick counts, there are currently 73 source packages
and 238 binary packages (at least for amd64) with such versions in sid
(excluding duplicates due to multiple versions of the same package
having ~dfsg in them).

I also noticed there are a couple source packages with ~repack, which
doesn't make sense for the same reasons, so maybe it could catch those
too.

(I guess this is sort of the flip side of #649277 -- that one deals
with missing ~ where it should probably be used, this one deals with
using ~ where it doesn't make sense.)
-- 
Daniel Schepler

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
Niels Thykier wrote:

> > I'm not sure Lintian should take a stand on this, since I know this
> > versioning scheme was intentional and done with thought for the
> > consequences in at least some cases.
> 
> Okay, I will take the liberty of tagging this as wontfix for now.  If
> the situation changes, we can revisit adding such a tag.

I'm actually going to go-ahead and close this rather than have an
arbitrary set of Lintian bugs closed and another arbitrary set
left open as "wontfix".


Regards,

-- 
      ,''`.
     : :'  :     Chris Lamb
     `. `'`      lamby@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk
       `-

--- End Message ---
Reply to: