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

Re: linhdd concerns (was: Re: Updated Debian Maintainers Keyring)



Bas Wijnen dijo [Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 04:51:30PM +0100]:
> >   or we could disallow the override of >= E: errors in lintian, and make
> > lintian reboot your computer, fill your gpg with /dev/random bits, and
> > install windows over your Debian if you override such errors.
> 
> Interesting idea.  I'd prefer to use a bit softer approach, if only
> because I wouldn't want to push our developers (DD or not) to non-free
> software, even if they misbehave. ;-)

Besides, I somehow doubt this would be legal or enforceable on all
jurisdiction. Just as an example, I doubt it would be legal and
enforceable for Lintian to install Windows on my PPC machines.

> How about letting lintian report all messages always, with an extra note
> for overrides?  Like this[0]:
> 
> I: Override installed for the following message:
> I: W: pioneers binary: binary-without-manpage usr/games/pioneers-editor
> 
> With -i, the first line should expand to something like:
> 
> I: Override installed for the following message:
> I: The maintainer installed an override for the following error.  This
> I: means that lintian is wrong about this, and there is nothing wrong
> I: with the package.
> 
> Or perhaps a little less maintainer-friendly, suggesting that the
> override could be incorrect. :-)

+1 to this. Overriden Lintian messages should be infrequent, as you
say, and the overrides should just demote the message to the point it
does not bother the person building anymore, but automated tools (and
fellow humans building the package, i.e. to sponsor, NMU or adopt it)
should nonetheless know there is _something_ Lintian does not like.

Greetings,

-- 
Gunnar Wolf - gwolf@gwolf.org - (+52-55)5623-0154 / 1451-2244
PGP key 1024D/8BB527AF 2001-10-23
Fingerprint: 0C79 D2D1 2C4E 9CE4 5973  F800 D80E F35A 8BB5 27AF

Attachment: pgp4cu0yM1Pnl.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: