On Sunday 18 March 2007 01:55, Mohammed Sameer wrote: > [snip] > > On Sat, Mar 17, 2007 at 05:15:18PM +0100, Thomas Jollans wrote: > > mentors.debian.org says that the package is lintian clean, my local > > lintian disagrees in points which are, IMHO, ignoreable (non-executable > > scripts in /usr/lib/chatplus which have wrappers in /usr/bin, one icon > > in /usr/lib/chatplus) > > W: chatplus: image-file-in-usr-lib usr/lib/chatplus/pixmaps/icon.png > N: > N: This package installs a pixmap or a bitmap within /usr/lib. According > N: to the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard, architecture-independent files > N: need to be placed within /usr/share instead. > > AFAICT. an icon in /usr/lib is against the File System Hierarchy. > > I'm not sure how the non-executable scripts should be handled but I guess > they should get the executable bit set. Due to this being more serious than I thought, I have uploaded a lintian and linda clean package with the same version number that splits /usr/lib and /usr/share. Due to a Reply-To header on this mailing list, I originally replied to Mohammed. Regards, Thomas Jollans
Attachment:
pgp3JME0RbJ4t.pgp
Description: PGP signature