Re: Listening to Lintian while packing a mod_perl module

[Colin Watson <cjwatson@debian.org>]

On Wed, Apr 30, 2003 at 05:12:03PM -0500, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> Per request of its current maintainer (Cc: of this mail goes to him), I
> am working on a NMU of libapache-request-perl because of a new upstream
> version. I would like to correct a couple of Lintian warnings in the
> process as well. I stumbled across this, however:
> 
> W: libapache-request-perl: package-installs-nonbinary-perl-in-usr-lib-perl5 usr/lib/perl5/Apache/libapreq.pm
> N:
> N:   Architecture-independent Perl code should be placed in
> N:   /usr/share/perl5, not /usr/lib/perl5.
> N:
> W: libapache-request-perl: package-installs-nonbinary-perl-in-usr-lib-perl5 usr/lib/perl5/Apache/Request.pm
> W: libapache-request-perl: package-installs-nonbinary-perl-in-usr-lib-perl5 usr/lib/perl5/Apache/Cookie.pm
> 
> Now, I started digging a bit into this - Out of 752 files I have in my
> /usr/lib/perl5, 121 are plain Perl modules - Quite a sizable proportion!
> Is this policy requirement enforceable at all? Could lintian be raising
> a false positive warning?

I think this lintian warning is rubbish, as does the perl maintainer:

  http://lists.debian.org/debian-perl-0301/msg00000.html

I suggest adding a lintian override. The modules in question are closely
tied to their XS implementations; if they ever got out of sync (i.e. if
somebody was seriously sharing /usr/share between machines, rather than
it just being a theoretical exercise) the consequences would be
unpleasant.

-- 
Colin Watson                                  [cjwatson@flatline.org.uk]