Re: Bug#167886: marked as done (tux-aqfh-data: should replace older versions of tux-aqfh )
Colin Watson <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> On Sun, Dec 01, 2002 at 05:33:18AM -0600, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
> > tux-aqfh (1.0.14-2) unstable; urgency=low
> > .
> > * QA upload.
> > * Make tux-aqfh-data replace tux-aqfh (<< 1.0.14-1) to avoid conflicts
> > on upgrade. Closes: #167886.
> > * Remove undocumented(7) symlink for tux_aqfh(6). Its lack has been
> > reported as #171283; add Lintian override.
> > * Conforms to Standards version 3.5.8.
> Why the Lintian override?
I was under the impression packages with Lintian errors are a big no-no.
Overriding link-to-undocumented-manpage was acceptable:
W: tux-aqfh: link-to-undocumented-manpage usr/share/man/man6/tux_aqfh.6.gz
N: Symbolic links to the undocumented(7) manual page may be provided only
N: when a bug has been filed that no manual page is available. If you
N: like, you may report the bug yourself, and add an override for this
N: warning in your package.
If we override binary-without-manpage for reported bugs, it'll be easy
to spot unreported ones.
> If there's no man page, the error should stay there without being
> overridden so that it appears on summaries like
How did it work in the undocumented(7) days then?