[Pkg-clamav-devel] Add source:Version minimum version requirements for freshclam to clamav, clamav-daemon, and clamav-milter

Andreas Cadhalpun andreas.cadhalpun at googlemail.com
Sun Jul 27 21:27:57 UTC 2014


On 27.07.2014 20:20, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Sunday, July 27, 2014 17:46:13 Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 18.07.2014 04:13, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>>> It took me a bit of thinking it through, bit I got your point now.  My
>>> goal
>>> was to make sure if you upgraded to a new upstream release of
>>> clamav/clamav- daemon/clamav-milter you upgraded clamav-freshclam too.
>>
>> I had a look at 'man deb-substvars' and it seems that for this purpose
>> the best thing would be to use '>= ${source:Upstream-Version}'.
>
> That would, indeed, be best.

OK, I changed that now.

When running lintian over the resulting binaries, I noticed some new errors:
N: Processing binary package libclamav-dev (version 0.98.4+dfsg-3, arch 
amd64) ...
E: libclamav-dev: pkg-config-bad-directive usr/lib/pkgconfig/libclamav.pc -g
E: libclamav-dev: pkg-config-bad-directive 
usr/lib/pkgconfig/libclamav.pc -fstack-protector
E: libclamav-dev: pkg-config-bad-directive 
usr/lib/pkgconfig/libclamav.pc -O2
E: libclamav-dev: pkg-config-bad-directive 
usr/lib/pkgconfig/libclamav.pc --param=ssp-buffer-size=4
E: libclamav-dev: pkg-config-bad-directive 
usr/lib/pkgconfig/libclamav.pc -Wall

It seems that the libclamav.pc.in has an unnecessary @CFLAGS@ in the 
CFlags row, but I'm not sure if it is really safe to just remove it.
What do you think?

Best regards,
Andreas




More information about the Pkg-clamav-devel mailing list