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

Re: lintian goes wild?



On Sat, Sep 08, 2001 at 12:12:47PM -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
> 
> On 08-Sep-2001 Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I get a lot of those with lintian on m68k:
> > 
> > Operator or semicolon missing before &supported at (eval 115) line 1.
> > Ambiguous use of & resolved as operator & at (eval 115) line 1.
> > Unquoted string "supported" may clash with future reserved word at (eval
> > 112) line 1.
> > 
> 
> your package may be hitting a section of code that has not been hit in a while.
>  Or perhaps the version of perl on m68k is different that what the rest of us
> use.
I ran lintian on i386 (and I updated the m68k version to 1.20.14.1 as well).
The messages do not appear on i386, but they do appear on m68k.
So I guess its a perl problem? perl is 5.6.1-5 on both machines.
 
> How about submitting a bug with a full dump of the error.  From this I can not
> tell what file it is complaining about or what lintian warning it may have been
> testing for.
You mean lintian -d? Well, whose bug is it? I'm neither a perl nor a lintian
expert, but the log doesn't give me any clue... a few more line with debug
output, if you need more, just let me know. If you insist on a bug report,
tell me.

N: Laboratory: /tmp/lintian-lab.5691
N: Distribution directory: 
N: Default unpack level: 1
N: Architecture: any
N: ----
N: Processing changes file amiga-fdisk_0.04-6_m68k.changes ...
N: Setting up lab in /tmp/lintian-lab.5691 ...
N: Processing 3 packages...
N: Selected action: check
N: Requested unpack level: 1
N: Requested data to collect: doc-base-files,menu-files,override-file,file-info,objdump-info,scripts,diffstat,changelog-file,md5sums,debfiles,copyright-file,init.d,debian-readme
N: Selected checks: description,binaries,manpages,etcfiles,infofiles,control-files,cruft,spelling,md5sums,copyright-file,menus,init.d,debian-readme,standards-version,files,debconf,debdiff,fields,scripts,conffiles,menu-format,changelog-file,shared-libs,debhelper
N: ----
N: Processing source package amiga-fdisk (version 0.04-6) ...
N: Base directory in lab: /tmp/lintian-lab.5691/source/amiga-fdisk
N: Current unpack level is 0
N: Unpacking package to level 1 ...
N: Current unpack level is 1
N: Collecting info: diffstat ...
Unquoted string "supported" may clash with future reserved word at (eval 112) line 1.
Operator or semicolon missing before &supported at (eval 112) line 1.
Ambiguous use of & resolved as operator & at (eval 112) line 1.
Unquoted string "supported" may clash with future reserved word at (eval 115) line 1.
Operator or semicolon missing before &supported at (eval 115) line 1.
Ambiguous use of & resolved as operator & at (eval 115) line 1.
N: Current unpack level is 1
N: Unpacking package to level 2 ...
N: /usr/share/lintian/unpack/unpack-srcpkg-l2 /tmp/lintian-lab.5691/source/amiga-fdisk
Operator or semicolon missing before &supported at (eval 112) line 1.
Ambiguous use of & resolved as operator & at (eval 112) line 1.
Operator or semicolon missing before &supported at (eval 115) line 1.
Ambiguous use of & resolved as operator & at (eval 115) line 1.
N: Collecting info: debfiles ...
Unquoted string "supported" may clash with future reserved word at (eval 112) line 1.
Operator or semicolon missing before &supported at (eval 112) line 1.
Ambiguous use of & resolved as operator & at (eval 112) line 1.
Unquoted string "supported" may clash with future reserved word at (eval 115) line 1.
Operator or semicolon missing before &supported at (eval 115) line 1.
Ambiguous use of & resolved as operator & at (eval 115) line 1.
N: Current unpack level is 2
N: Running check: cruft ...
N: Current unpack level is 2
N: Running check: standards-version ...
N: Current unpack level is 2
N: Running check: debdiff ...
N: Current unpack level is 2
N: Running check: fields ...
N: Current unpack level is 2
N: Running check: debhelper ...
N: Decreasing unpack level to 1 (removing files) ...
[...]

BTW, I get the same messages on m68k for other packages.

Christian



Reply to: