2 Author: Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt <marc@marcbrockschmidt.de>
4 Type: binary, udeb, source
6 Needs-Info: debfiles, source-control-file
7 Info: This script checks the syntax of the fields in package control files,
8 as described in the Policy Manual.
10 Tag: unsupported-source-format
13 Info: This package uses a different source package format than 1.0. At
14 present, only <tt>Format: 1.0</tt> packages are permitted by the Debian
15 archive software. Newer package formats are supported by dpkg, but they
16 should not yet be used for upload to Debian.
21 Info: The package does not have a "Package:" field in its control file.
27 Info: A package name should be at least two characters long, must consist
28 of the alphanumerics and "+" "-" and ".", and must start with an
29 alphanumeric character.
32 Tag: package-not-lowercase
35 Info: New packages should not use uppercase characters in their names.
41 Info: The package does not have a "Version:" field in its control file.
44 Tag: bad-version-number
47 Info: The version number fails one of the syntactic requirements of dpkg.
50 Tag: upstream-version-not-numeric
53 Info: The upstream version number should start with a digit.
56 Tag: debian-revision-not-well-formed
59 Info: The debian version part (the part after the -) should consist of one
60 or two dot-separated parts: one for a regular maintainer release or two
62 Ref: devref 5.11.2, policy 5.6.12
64 Tag: debian-revision-should-not-be-zero
67 Info: The debian version part (the part after the -) should start with one,
68 not with zero. This is to ensure that a correctly-done Maintainer Upload will
69 always have a higher version number than a Non-Maintainer upload: a NMU could
70 have been prepared which introduces this upstream version with
74 Tag: no-architecture-field
77 Info: The package does not have an "Architecture:" field in its control file.
80 Tag: magic-arch-in-arch-list
83 Info: The special architecture value "any" only make sense if it occurs
84 alone. The value "all" may appear together with other architectures
85 in a *.dsc file but must occur alone if used in a binary package.
88 Tag: unknown-architecture
91 Info: This package claims to be for an unknown architecture. The
92 architecture should be one of the values supported by dpkg or one of the
93 special values "all" or "any". The special value "source" is only used
94 in *.changes files and does not make sense in a binary package or a *.dsc
97 Tag: too-many-architectures
100 Info: A binary package should list exactly one architecture (the one it is
101 compiled for), or the special value "all" if it is architecture-independent.
104 Tag: arch-any-in-binary-pkg
107 Info: The special architecture value "any" does not make sense in a binary
111 Tag: aspell-package-not-arch-all
114 Info: This package appears to be an aspell dictionary package, but it is
115 not Architecture: all. The binary hashes should be built at install-time
116 by calling aspell-autobuildhash, so the contents of the package should be
117 architecture-independent.
118 Ref: aspell-autobuildhash(8)
120 Tag: no-maintainer-field
123 Info: The package does not have a "Maintainer:" field in its control file.
126 Tag: maintainer-name-missing
129 Info: The maintainer field seems to contain just an email address. It must
130 contain the package maintainer's name and email address.
133 Tag: maintainer-address-missing
136 Info: The maintainer field should contain the package maintainer's name and
137 email address, with the name followed by the address inside angle
138 brackets (< and >). The address seems to be missing.
141 Tag: maintainer-address-malformed
144 Info: The maintainer field could not be parsed according to the rules in
148 Tag: maintainer-not-full-name
151 Info: The "name" part of this maintainer field is just one word, so it
152 might not be a full name.
154 Tag: maintainer-address-looks-weird
157 Info: The maintainer address does not have whitespace between the name
158 and the email address.
160 Tag: maintainer-address-is-on-localhost
163 Info: The maintainer address includes localhost(.localdomain), which is
164 an invalid e-mail address.
167 Tag: uploader-name-missing
170 Info: The uploader field seems to contain just an email address. It must
171 contain the package uploader's name and email address.
174 Tag: uploader-address-missing
177 Info: The uploader field should contain the package uploader's name and
178 email address, with the name followed by the address inside angle
179 brackets (< and >). The address seems to be missing.
182 Tag: uploader-address-malformed
185 Info: The uploader field could not be parsed according to the rules in
189 Tag: uploader-not-full-name
192 Info: The "name" part of this uploader field is just one word, so it
193 might not be a full name.
195 Tag: uploader-address-looks-weird
198 Info: The uploader address does not have whitespace between the name
199 and the email address.
201 Tag: uploader-address-is-on-localhost
204 Info: The uploader address includes localhost(.localdomain), which is
205 an invalid e-mail address.
208 Tag: wrong-debian-qa-address-set-as-maintainer
211 Info: Orphaned packages should no longer have the address
212 <debian-qa@lists.debian.org> in the Maintainer field.
214 The correct Maintainer field for orphaned packages is
215 Debian QA Group <packages@qa.debian.org>.
218 Tag: wrong-debian-qa-group-name
221 Info: Orphaned packages should have "Debian QA Group
222 <packages@qa.debian.org>" in the maintainer field.
225 Tag: no-human-maintainers
228 Info: The Maintainer address for this package is a mailing list and there
229 are no Uploaders listed. Team-maintained packages should list the human
230 maintainers in the Uploaders field.
236 Info: The package does not have a "Source:" field in its control file.
239 Tag: source-field-does-not-match-pkg-name
242 Info: The source package's filename is not the same as the name given
243 in its Source field. The Source field should name the package.
246 Tag: source-field-malformed
249 Info: In a binary package, the Source field should identify the source
250 package from which the package was compiled. It should be the
251 source package name, optionally followed by a version number
255 Tag: essential-in-source-package
258 Info: This field should only appear in binary packages.
261 Tag: essential-no-not-needed
264 Info: Having "Essential: no" is the same as not having the field at all,
265 so it just makes the Packages file longer with no benefit.
268 Tag: unknown-essential-value
271 Info: The only valid values for the Essential field are yes and no.
274 Tag: no-section-field
277 Info: The package does not have a "Section:" field in its control file.
279 The field is mandatory for source packages and optional for binary
280 packages, which use the source package's value as default is nothing
287 Info: The "Section:" field in this package's control file is not one of
288 the sections in use on the ftp archive. Valid sections are currently
289 admin, comm, cli-mono, database, debug, devel, doc,
290 editors, electronics, embedded, fonts, games, gnome, gnu-r,
291 gnustep, graphics, hamradio, haskell, httpd, interpreters,
292 java, kde, libdevel, libs, lisp, localization, kernel, mail,
293 math, misc, net, news, ocaml, oldlibs, otherosfs, perl,
294 php, python, ruby, science, shells, sound, tex, text,
295 utils, vcs, video, web, x11, xfce, zope.
297 The section name should be preceded by "non-free/" if the package
298 is in the non-free archive area, and by "contrib/" if the package
299 is in the contrib archive area.
302 Tag: section-is-dh_make-template
305 Info: The "Section:" field in this package's control file is set to
306 unknown. This is not a valid section, and usually means a dh_make
307 template control file was used and never modified to set the correct
311 Tag: wrong-section-for-udeb
314 Info: udeb packages should have "Section: debian-installer".
316 Tag: no-priority-field
319 Info: The package does not have a "Priority:" field in its control file.
321 The Priority field can be included in a binary package by passing
322 the -ip or -isp flags to dpkg-gencontrol when building the package.
323 The field is optional in binary packages.
326 Tag: unknown-priority
329 Info: The "Priority:" field in this package's control file is not one of
330 the priorities defined in the Policy Manual.
333 Tag: superfluous-clutter-in-homepage
336 Info: The "Homepage:" field in this package's control file contains
337 superfluous markup around the URL, like enclosing < and >.
338 This is unnecessary and needlessly complicates using this information.
344 Info: The "Homepage:" field in this package's control file does not
345 contain a valid absolute URL. Most probably you forgot to specify
346 the scheme (e.g. http).
348 Tag: no-homepage-field
351 Info: This non-native package lacks a <tt>Homepage</tt> field. If the
352 package has an upstream home page that contains useful information or
353 resources for the end user, consider adding a <tt>Homepage</tt> control
354 field to <tt>debian/control</tt>.
357 Tag: homepage-for-cpan-package-contains-version
360 Info: The Homepage field for this package points to CPAN and the URL
361 includes the version. It's better to link to the unversioned CPAN page
362 so that the URL doesn't have to be updated for each new release. For
365 http://search.cpan.org/~samtregar/HTML-Template/
369 http://search.cpan.org/~samtregar/HTML-Template-2.9/
374 Info: This field is listed in the Policy Manual as obsolete and
375 not-to-be-present in any package.
378 Tag: unknown-field-in-dsc
381 Info: See the Policy Manual for a list of the possible fields in
382 a source package control file.
385 Tag: unknown-field-in-control
388 Info: See the Policy Manual for a list of the possible fields in
389 a binary package control file.
391 In udeb packages the fields pre-depends, conflicts, essential and
392 suggests are disallowed, but they can contain the new fields
393 subarchitecture and installer-menu-item.
399 Info: Most control fields must have only a single line of data.
402 Tag: alternates-not-allowed
405 Info: Only the "Depends", "Recommends", "Suggests" and "Pre-Depends"
406 fields may specify alternate dependencies using the "|" symbol.
409 Tag: versioned-provides
413 Info: The "Provides" field may not specify a version range.
415 Tag: obsolete-relation-form
419 Info: The forms "<" and ">" mean "<=" and ">=", not "<<"
420 and ">>" as one might expect. For that reason these forms are
421 obsolete, and should not be used in new packages. Use the longer forms
424 Tag: bad-version-in-relation
428 Info: The version number used in this relationship does not match the
429 defined format of a version number.
431 Tag: package-relation-with-self
434 Info: The package declares a relationship with itself. This is not very
435 useful, except in the case of a package Conflicting with itself, if its
436 package name doubles as a virtual package.
441 Info: The package declares a relationship that could not be parsed according
442 to the rules given in the Policy Manual.
445 Tag: new-essential-package
448 Info: This package has the Essential flag set. New Essential packages
449 are sufficiently rare that it seems worth warning about. They should
450 be discussed on debian-devel first.
453 Tag: doc-package-depends-on-main-package
456 Info: The name of this package suggests that it is a documentation package.
457 It is usually not desirable for documentation packages to depend on the
458 packages they document, because users may want to install the docs before
459 they decide whether they want to install the package. Also, documentation
460 packages are often architecture-independent, so on other architectures
461 the package on which it depends may not even exist.
463 Tag: depends-on-obsolete-package
466 Info: The package depends on a package that has been superseded.
467 If the superseded package is part of an ORed group, it should not be
468 the first package in the group.
470 Tag: ored-depends-on-obsolete-package
473 Info: The package depends on an ORed group of packages which includes
474 a package that has been superseded.
476 Tag: build-depends-on-obsolete-package
479 Info: The package build-depends on a package that has been superseded.
480 If the superseded package is part of an ORed group, it should not be
481 the first package in the group.
483 Tag: ored-build-depends-on-obsolete-package
486 Info: The package build-depends on an ORed group of packages which includes
487 a package that has been superseded.
489 Tag: depends-on-old-emacs
492 Info: The package lists an old version of Emacs as its first dependency.
493 It should probably be updated to support the current version of Emacs
494 in the archive and then list that version first in the list of Emacs
497 If the package intentionally only supports older versions of Emacs (if,
498 for example, it was included with later versions of Emacs), add a lintian
501 Tag: depends-on-x-metapackage
504 Info: Packages that are not themselves metapackages must not depend on X
505 Window System metapackages.
507 The metapackages xorg, xorg-dev, x-window-system, x-window-system-dev, and
508 x-window-system-core exist only for the benefit of users and dependencies
509 for other metapackages and should not be used in regular package
512 Tag: build-depends-on-x-metapackage
515 Info: Packages must not build-depend on X Window System metapackages.
517 The metapackages xorg, xorg-dev, x-window-system, x-window-system-dev, and
518 x-window-system-core exist only for the benefit of users and should not
519 be used in package build dependencies.
521 Tag: depends-on-essential-package-without-using-version
525 Info: The package declares a depends on an essential package, e.g. dpkg,
526 without using a versioned depends. Packages do not need to depend on
527 essential packages; essential means that they will always be present.
528 The only reason to list an explicit dependency on an essential package
529 is if you need a particular version of that package, in which case the
530 version should be given in the dependency.
532 Tag: build-depends-on-essential-package-without-using-version
536 Info: The package declares a build-depends on an essential package, e.g. dpkg,
537 without using a versioned depends. Packages do not need to build-depend on
538 essential packages; essential means that they will always be present.
539 The only reason to list an explicit dependency on an essential package
540 is if you need a particular version of that package, in which case the
541 version should be given in the dependency.
543 Tag: virtual-package-depends-without-real-package-depends
546 Info: The package declares a depends on a virtual package without listing a
547 real package as an alternative first.
549 If this package could ever be a build dependency, it should list a real
550 package as the first alternative to any virtual package in its Depends.
551 Otherwise, the build daemons will not be able to provide a consistent
554 If it will never be a build dependency, this isn't necessary, but you may
555 want to consider doing so anyway if there is a real package providing
556 that virtual package that most users will want to use.
558 Tag: invalid-arch-string-in-source-relation
562 Info: The architecture string in the source relation does not follow policy.
563 A common cause of this is a comma in the arch, i.e. [i386, m68k], it should
566 Tag: depends-on-build-essential-package-without-using-version
570 Info: The package declares a depends on a build essential package without
571 using a versioned depends. Packages do not have to build-depend on any
572 package included in build-essential. It is the responsibility of anyone
573 building packages to have all build-essential packages installed. The
574 only reason for an explicit dependency on a package included in
575 build-essential is if a particular version of that package is required,
576 in which case the dependency should include the version.
578 Tag: package-depends-on-an-x-font-package
581 Info: Packages must not depend on X Window System font packages.
583 If one or more of the fonts so packaged are necessary for proper operation
584 of the package with which they are associated the font package may be
585 Recommended; if the fonts merely provide an enhancement, a Suggests
586 relationship may be used.
589 Tag: build-depends-indep-without-arch-indep
593 Info: The control file specifies source relations for architecture-independent
594 packages, but no architecture-independent packages are built.
596 Tag: build-depends-without-arch-dep
600 Info: The control file lists the given package in Build-Depends, but no
601 architecture-dependent packages are built. If all the packages built are
602 architecture-independent, the only packages that should be listed in
603 Build-Depends are those required to run the clean target (such as
604 debhelper if you use dh_clean). Other build dependencies should be listed
605 in Build-Depends-Indep instead.
607 Tag: clean-should-be-satisfied-by-build-depends
611 Info: The specified package is required to run the clean target of
612 <tt>debian/rules</tt> and therefore must be listed in Build-Depends, not
613 Build-Depends-Indep, even if no architecture-dependent packages are
616 Tag: missing-build-dependency
620 Info: The package doesn't specify a build dependency on a package that is
621 used in <tt>debian/rules</tt>.
623 lintian intentionally does not take into account transitive dependencies.
624 Even if the package build-depends on some package that in turn
625 build-depends on the needed package, an explicit build dependency should
626 be added. Otherwise, a latent bug is created that will appear without
627 warning if the other package is ever updated to change its dependencies.
628 Even if this seems unlikely, please always add explicit build
629 dependencies on every non-essential, non-build-essential package that is
630 used directly during the build.
632 Tag: missing-python-build-dependency
636 Info: The package appears to use Python as part of its build process in
637 <tt>debian/rules</tt> but doesn't depend on Python.
639 Normally, packages that use Python as part of the build process should
640 build-depend on one of python, python-all, python-dev, or python-all-dev
641 depending on whether they support multiple versions of Python and whether
642 they're building modules or only using Python as part of the package
643 build process. Packages that depend on a specific version of Python may
644 build-depend on the appropriate pythonX.Y or pythonX.Y-dev package
647 Tag: missing-dh_python-build-dependency
651 Info: The package runs dh_python in <tt>debian/rules</tt> but doesn't
652 build-depend on python or python-dev. dh_python requires
653 <tt>/usr/bin/python</tt> to run, so packages using dh_python must
654 build-depend on python (or python-dev or python-all-dev, which in turn
655 depend on python), even if they don't otherwise need Python to build.
657 Tag: build-conflicts-with-build-dependency
661 Info: The package build-conflicts with a package that it also
664 Tag: package-has-a-duplicate-build-relation
667 Info: The package declares the given build relations on the same package
668 in either Build-Depends or Build-Depends-Indep, but the build relations
669 imply each other and are therefore redundant.
671 Tag: build-depends-on-1-revision
674 Info: The package declares a build dependency on a version of a package
675 with a -1 Debian revision such as "libfoo (>= 1.2-1)". Such a
676 dependency will not be satisfied by a backport of libfoo 1.2-1 and
677 therefore makes backporting unnecessarily difficult. Normally, the -1
678 version is unneeded and a dependency such as "libfoo (>= 1.2)" would
679 be sufficient. If there was an earlier -0.X version of libfoo that would
680 not satisfy the dependency, use "libfoo (>= 1.2-1~)" instead.
682 Tag: needlessly-depends-on-awk
685 Info: The package seems to declare a relation on awk. awk is a virtual
686 package, but it is special since it's de facto essential. If you don't
687 need to depend on a specific version of awk (which wouldn't work anyway,
688 as dpkg doesn't support versioned provides), you should remove the
691 Tag: package-depends-on-multiple-libstdc-versions
694 Info: The package seems to declare several relations to a libstdc version.
695 This is not only sloppy but in the case of libraries, it may well break
696 the runtime execution of programs.
698 Tag: package-depends-on-multiple-tcl-versions
701 Info: The package seems to declare several relations to a tcl version.
702 This is not only sloppy but in the case of libraries, it may well break
703 the runtime execution of programs.
705 Tag: package-depends-on-multiple-tclx-versions
708 Info: The package seems to declare several relations to a tclx version.
709 This is not only sloppy but in the case of libraries, it may well break
710 the runtime execution of programs.
712 Tag: package-depends-on-multiple-tk-versions
715 Info: The package seems to declare several relations to a tk version.
716 This is not only sloppy but in the case of libraries, it may well break
717 the runtime execution of programs.
719 Tag: package-depends-on-multiple-tkx-versions
722 Info: The package seems to declare several relations to a tkx version.
723 This is not only sloppy but in the case of libraries, it may well break
724 the runtime execution of programs.
726 Tag: package-depends-on-multiple-libpng-versions
729 Info: The package seems to declare several relations to a libpng version.
730 This is not only sloppy but in the case of libraries, it may well break
731 the runtime execution of programs.
733 Tag: depends-on-libdb1-compat
736 Info: The package seems to declare a relation on libdb1-compat.
737 This library exists for compatibility with applications built against
738 glibc 2.0 or 2.1. There is intentionally no corresponding development
739 package. Do not link new applications against this library!
741 Tag: depends-on-python-minimal
744 Info: The python-minimal package (and versioned variants thereof) exists
745 only to possibly become an Essential package. Depending on it is always
746 an error since it should never be installed without python. If it
747 becomes Essential, there is no need to depend on it, and until then,
748 packages that require Python must depend on python.
750 Tag: depends-exclusively-on-makedev
753 Info: This package depends on makedev without a udev alternative. This
754 probably means that it doesn't have udev rules and relies on makedev to
755 create devices, which won't work if udev is installed and running.
756 Alternatively, it may mean that there are udev rules, but udev was not
757 added as an alternative to the makedev dependency.
759 Tag: dbg-package-missing-depends
762 Info: The given binary package has a name of the form of "X-dbg", indicating it
763 contains detached debugging symbols for the package X. If so, it should
764 depend on the corresponding package, generally with (= ${binary:Version})
765 since the debugging symbols are only useful with the binaries created by
768 If this package provides debugging symbols for multiple other
769 packages, it should normally depend on all of those packages as
770 alternatives. In other words, <tt>pkga (= ${binary:Version}) | pkgb (=
771 ${binary:Version)</tt> and so forth.
773 Tag: conflicts-with-dependency
777 Info: The package seems to conflict with one of its dependencies,
778 recommendations, or suggestions by listing it in Conflicts or Breaks.
780 Tag: breaks-without-version
784 Info: This package declares a Breaks relationship with another package
785 that has no version number. Normally, Breaks should be used to indicate
786 an incompatibility with a specific version of another package, or with
787 all versions predating a fix. If the two packages can never be installed
788 at the same time, Conflicts should normally be used instead.
793 Info: The field Installer-Menu-Item should only contain positive integer
796 Tag: redundant-origin-field
799 Info: You use the Origin field though the field value is the default (Debian).
800 In this case the field is redundant and should be removed.
802 Tag: binary-nmu-uses-old-version-style
806 Info: The version number of a binary NMU should be formed by appending
807 <tt>+b</tt> and a digit to the source version. This version scheme is
808 special-cased by the archive software. The -x.x.x version number style
809 should no longer be used.
811 Tag: binary-nmu-debian-revision-in-source
815 Info: The version number of your source package ends in +b and a number or
816 has a Debian revision containing three parts. These version numbers are
817 used by binary NMUs and should not be used as the source version. (The
818 +b form is the current standard; the three-part version number now
821 Tag: dfsg-version-in-native-package
824 Info: The version number of this package contains "dfsg", but it's a
825 native package. "dfsg" is conventionally used in the upstream version of
826 packages that are repackaged for Debian Free Software Guidelines
827 compliance reasons. The convention doesn't make sense in native
830 Tag: dfsg-version-with-period
833 Info: The version number of this package contains ".dfsg", probably in a
834 form like "1.2.dfsg1". There is a suble sorting problem with this
835 version method: 1.2.dfsg1 is considered a later version than 1.2.1. If
836 upstream adds another level to its versioning, finding a good version
837 number for the next upstream release will be awkward.
839 Upstream may never do this, in which case this isn't a problem, but it's
840 normally better to use "+dfsg" instead (such as "1.2+dfsg1"). "+" sorts
841 before ".", so 1.2 < 1.2+dfsg1 < 1.2.1 as normally desired.
843 Tag: dfsg-version-misspelled
846 Info: The version number of this package contains "dsfg". You probably
847 meant "dfsg", the conventional marker for upstream packages that are
848 repackaged for Debian Free Software Guidelines compliance reasons.
850 Tag: redundant-bugs-field
853 Info: You use the Bugs field though the field value is the default
854 (debbugs://bugs.debian.org/). In this case the field is redundant and
857 Tag: build-depends-on-build-essential
858 Info: You depend on the build-essential package, which is only a
862 meta-package depending on build tools that have to be installed in all
865 Tag: malformed-python-version
868 Ref: python-policy 2.3
869 Info: The Python-Version control field is not in one of the valid
870 formats. It should be in one of the following formats:
876 >= A.B, << X.Y
879 (One or more specific versions may be listed with the last form.) A.B
880 and X.Y should be Python versions.
882 Tag: old-versioned-python-dependency
885 Info: This package appears to be an architecture-independent Python module
886 but has a dependency on a version of python less than a particular
887 version, doesn't use python-support and no Python-Version control field.
888 This normally means that the package isn't using the current Python
889 policy; most architecture-independent Python packages will work with any
890 future version of Python if they follow the new policy.
892 If this package really does require only a particular range of Python
893 versions and uses python-central, add a Python-Version control field (as
894 described in 2.3 of the Python policy) to resolve this warning.
896 Tag: malformed-dm-upload-allowed
899 Ref: http://www.debian.org/vote/2007/vote_003
900 Info: The Dm-Upload-Allowed field in this package is set to something
901 other than "yes". The only standardized value for this field in the
902 Debian GR is "yes" and other values (including capitalization variants)
903 may not work as expected.
905 Tag: wrong-section-according-to-package-name
908 Info: This package has a name suggesting that it belongs to a section
909 other than the one it is currently categorized in.
911 Tag: debug-package-should-be-priority-extra
914 Info: This package has a name suggesting that it contains detached
915 debugging symbols. If so, it should have priority "extra" since users
916 normally do not need such packages.
918 Tag: maintainer-also-in-uploaders
921 Info: The maintainer value also appears on the <tt>Uploaders</tt> field.
922 There were some reasons why this was useful when Uploaders support was
923 first introduced, but those have long-since been fixed and there is no
924 longer any need to list the maintainer in Uploaders. The duplicate
925 information should probably be removed.
927 Tag: duplicate-uploader
930 Info: The uploader appears more than once in the <tt>Uploaders</tt>
931 field. The duplicate information should be removed.
933 Tag: versioned-dependency-satisfied-by-perl
936 Info: This package declares an unnecessary versioned dependency
937 on a package that is also provided by one of the Perl core packages
938 (perl, perl-base, perl-modules) with at least the required version.
940 As versioned dependencies are not satisfied by provided packages,
941 this unnecessarily pulls in a separately packaged newer version
944 The recommended way to express the dependency without needless
945 complications on backporting packages is to use alternative dependencies.
946 The Perl core package should be the preferred alternative and the
947 versioned dependency a secondary one.
949 Example: perl-modules (>= 5.10.0) | libmodule-build-perl (>= 0.26)
952 Tag: package-superseded-by-perl
955 Info: This package is also provided by one of the Perl core packages
956 (perl, perl-base, perl-modules), and the core version is at least
959 The package should either be upgraded to a newer upstream version
960 or removed from the archive as unnecessary. In the removal case, any
961 versioned dependencies on this package must first be changed to include
962 the Perl core package (because versioned dependencies are not satisfied
963 by provided packages).
965 The recommended way to express the dependency without needless
966 complications on backporting packages is to use alternative dependencies.
967 The Perl core package should be the preferred alternative and the
968 versioned dependency a secondary one.
970 Example: perl-modules (>= 5.10.0) | libmodule-build-perl (>= 0.26)
973 Tag: vcs-field-uses-not-recommended-uri-format
976 Info: The VCS-* field uses an URI which doesn't match the recommended
977 format, but still looks valid. Examples for not recommended URI formats
978 are protocols that require authentication (like SSH). Instead where
979 possible you should provide an URI that is accessible for everyone
980 without authentication.
982 Tag: vcs-field-uses-unknown-uri-format
985 Info: The VCS-* field uses an URI which doesn't match any known format.
986 You might have forgotten the protocol before the hostname.