On Friday, April 27 2018, Fabian Wolff wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor for a QA upload of the link-grammar > package. > > My changes are summarized in the latest changelog entry: > > link-grammar (5.4.4-1) unstable; urgency=medium > > * QA upload. > * New upstream release. > * Update symbols file. > * Remove trailing whitespace from debian/changelog in order to > silence the file-contains-trailing-whitespace Lintian tag. > * Upgrade to debhelper compat version 11. > * Remove the empty file debian/patches/series. > * Use HTTPS URI in debian/watch. > * Upgrade to Standards-Version 4.1.4 (no changes). > * Add debian/python3-link-grammar.lintian-overrides to override the > python-package-depends-on-package-from-other-python-variant > Lintian tag. > * Update Vcs-Browser and Vcs-Git fields in debian/control. > * Update Homepage field in debian/control and Source field in > debian/copyright to use HTTPS. > * Remove incorrect Multi-Arch fields in debian/control. > > -- Fabian Wolff <fabi.wolff@arcor.de> Fri, 27 Apr 2018 15:35:36 +0200 Hey Fabian, Thanks for taking care of this package. > I have to admit that I'm not entirely sure about the Multi-Arch fields > that I removed. The link-grammar binary package installs an > architecture-dependent binary into /usr/bin, but it was marked > Multi-Arch: foreign, which looked suspect to me. Also, the > liblink-grammar-java package seems to have an incorrect Multi-Arch > field according to the Multiarch hinter: > > https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/link-grammar Yeah, the link-grammar package shouldn't be "Multi-Arch: foreign" indeed. As for the "Multi-Arch: same" issue, I also agree with your solution; it seems that removing the field is the most sensible approach here. > Other than that, I made sure that the autopkgtests pass and that the > package is mostly Lintian-clean, save for several > package-has-unnecessary-activation-of-ldconfig-trigger warnings > (which, according to the Lintian tag documentation, might be due to a > debhelper bug) and an orig-tarball-missing-upstream-signature warning > (which I would blame on git-buildpackage, see #872864). Agreed about both warnings. I have a few more things to say, but I'll send another e-mail soon. -- Sergio GPG key ID: 237A 54B1 0287 28BF 00EF 31F4 D0EB 7628 65FC 5E36 Please send encrypted e-mail if possible http://sergiodj.net/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature