Re: octomap_1.6.6-1_amd64.changes REJECTED
Hi,
On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 12:07:54PM +0200, Leopold Palomo-Avellaneda wrote:
> > >
> > > I have worked in the octomap package following the ftp-master
> > > advices. I have a lintian warning about:
> > >
> > > debian-watch-file-should-dversionmangle-not-uversionmangle
That's currently my most hated lintian warning - lintian is simply wrong
here since uscan knows the Files-Excluded feature. There are some
devscripts/uscan bugs/discussions around this.
> > Does something like the following patch work for your problem?
> >
> > diff --git a/debian/watch b/debian/watch
> > index ff4a10c..9a324ac 100644
> > --- a/debian/watch
> > +++ b/debian/watch
> > @@ -3,7 +3,5 @@
> > version=3
> >
> > # For GitHub projects you can use the tags page:
> > -opts=uversionmangle=s/$/+dfsg/ \
> > +opts=dversionmangle=s/\+dfsg// \
> > https://github.com/OctoMap/octomap/tags .*/v?(\d\S*)\.tar\.gz
> > -
>
> Good!!!!!!
... to suppress the lintian warning ... but bad if it comes to
downloading a properly named orig tarball. Please revert this and
ignore the lintian warning.
> Please Andreas, could you push it again? Jose modified your propose of debian
> watch. Really, you were testing us ;-)
This time it's not me who is testing you, sorry. ;-)
You can verify this by just trying
uscan --verbose --force-download --repack --compress xz
and see how the result will be named (in both cases).
Feel free to file a bug report against lintian / discuss this on
debian-devel.
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: