Control: tags -1 -moreinfo On Mon, 2021-05-31 at 20:25 +0200, Tobias Frost wrote: > I've took a look at your package: Awesome, thanks. > - d/copyright: > - The word "Comment:" went missing after the Files-Exlucded section. I don't believe this is an error. The Files-Excluded field is currently not specified by the machine-readable copyright specification (this is bug #685506), but at least the mk-origtargz manual page specifies that this should be what the spec calls 'formatted text', i.e. the current syntax should be valid: > (In debian/copyright, the Files-Excluded and Files-Excluded-component > stanzas are a part of the first paragraph and there is a blank line > before the following paragraphs which contain Files and other > stanzas. See uscan(1) "COPYRIGHT FILE EXAMPLE".) > - Please review the file. I see e.g the section for "Files: *" be > gone, not sure if that is intentional (I did not a d/copyright > review) This was intentional. > Lintian is the same oppionion that there is something missing: > > W: open-ath9k-htc-firmware source: file-without-copyright-information > .gitignore > W: open-ath9k-htc-firmware source: file-without-copyright-information > NOTICE.TXT > W: open-ath9k-htc-firmware source: file-without-copyright-information > README Those files have no copyright information, but they are so small they're probably not copyrightable. There s no copyright status to associate with them, so it's better that the copyright file say nothing at all with respect to them. > - W: open-ath9k-htc-firmware source: inconsistent-appstream- > metadata-license > debian/firmware-ath9k-htc.metainfo.xml (mit != expat) In my opinion this is a bug that could be fixed in Lintian. If you're not aware, the Expat license is a specific version of what's commonly known as the MIT license. The SPDX identifier (and hence the identifier used in the AppStream file) is MIT, although the Debian machine- readable copyright specification requests that one refer to the Expat license when that license is applicable. Basically, the copyright file referring to the Expat license is consistent with the AppStream metadata proclaiming that it is subject to the MIT license. > Some patch have fuzz... maybe refresh? If you're referring to Hunk #1 succeeded at 43 (offset -1 lines). Hunk #2 succeeded at 55 (offset -1 lines). Hunk #3 succeeded at 99 (offset -1 lines). Hunk #4 succeeded at 113 (offset -1 lines). Hunk #5 succeeded at 151 (offset -1 lines). then I believe this is normal, although refreshing the patches upstream shouldn't hurt.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part