Adding upstream version 2.117.0.upstream/2.117.0upstream

Signed-off-by: Daniel Baumann <daniel.baumann@progress-linux.org>

73 files changed, 670 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/tags/b/backgrounded-test-command.tag b/tags/b/backgrounded-test-command.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3e0dec1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/backgrounded-test-command.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+Tag: backgrounded-test-command
+Severity: error
+Check: testsuite
+Explanation:
+ This package declares a <code>Test-Command</code> that backgrounds
+ itself with an ampersand. That is not a good idea.
+ .
+ In the <code>autopkgtest</code> framework, the return value determines
+ whether a test was successful. It is therefore fundamental to the
+ testing process. Unfortunately, that value is being ignored here.
+ .
+ This test only fails when a message printed to <code>stderr</code>
+ wins a race with the <code>autopkgtest</code> harness. While that
+ may result in an accurate (but unreliable) detection of some test
+ failures, a review of archive-wide <code>autopkgtest</code> data
+ shows no failures for backgrounded test commands.
+ .
+ Many incidents of this tag are based on a faulty command that invokes
+ <code>xvfb-run</code> for GUI programs. It was likely adopted from an
+ existing package.
+ .
+ Please drop the ampersand at the end of the <code>Test-Command</code>.
+See-Also:
+ Bug#988591,
+ https://ci.debian.net/doc/
diff --git a/tags/b/backports-changes-missing.tag b/tags/b/backports-changes-missing.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c8a091f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/backports-changes-missing.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
+Tag: backports-changes-missing
+Severity: info
+Check: fields/distribution
+Explanation: The changes file only has changelog entries from a single version. It
+ is recommended for backports to include all changes since (old)stable or
+ the previous backport. This can be done by adding the '-v' option to the
+ build with the appropriate version.
+See-Also: http://backports.debian.org/Contribute/, Bug#785084
diff --git a/tags/b/backports-upload-has-incorrect-version-number.tag b/tags/b/backports-upload-has-incorrect-version-number.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b8e9edd
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/backports-upload-has-incorrect-version-number.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+Tag: backports-upload-has-incorrect-version-number
+Severity: error
+Check: fields/distribution
+Explanation: The version number doesn't comply with the standard backport version
+ rules. It should end in ~bpoX+N, where X is the release version number of
+ the target distribution.
+See-Also: http://backports.debian.org/Contribute/
diff --git a/tags/b/backup-file-in-package.tag b/tags/b/backup-file-in-package.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c30af74
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/backup-file-in-package.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+Tag: backup-file-in-package
+Severity: warning
+Check: files/unwanted
+Explanation: There is a file in the package whose name matches the format emacs
+ or vim uses for backup and autosave files. It may have been installed by
+ accident.
diff --git a/tags/b/bad-distribution-in-changes-file.tag b/tags/b/bad-distribution-in-changes-file.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..93b0f1c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/bad-distribution-in-changes-file.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
+Tag: bad-distribution-in-changes-file
+Severity: error
+Check: fields/distribution
+Explanation: You've specified an unknown target distribution for your upload in
+ the <code>debian/changelog</code> file. It is possible that you are uploading
+ for a different distribution than the one Lintian is checking for. In
+ that case, passing --profile $VENDOR may fix this warning.
+ .
+ Note that the distributions <code>non-free</code> and <code>contrib</code> are no
+ longer valid. You'll have to use distribution <code>unstable</code> and
+ <code>Section: non-free/xxx</code> or <code>Section: contrib/xxx</code> instead.
+See-Also: debian-policy 5.6.14
diff --git a/tags/b/bad-exception-format-in-dep5-copyright.tag b/tags/b/bad-exception-format-in-dep5-copyright.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7731110
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/bad-exception-format-in-dep5-copyright.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+Tag: bad-exception-format-in-dep5-copyright
+Severity: warning
+Check: debian/copyright/dep5
+See-Also: https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
+Explanation: The “License” field contains a short name with a bad exception
+ format. According to specification format of exception is:
+ shortlicencename with exceptionname exception.
+ .
+ If more than one exception applies to a single license,
+ an arbitrary short name must be used instead.
diff --git a/tags/b/bad-homepage.tag b/tags/b/bad-homepage.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..9edbbcd
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/bad-homepage.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
+Tag: bad-homepage
+Severity: warning
+Check: fields/homepage
+Explanation: The "Homepage:" field in this package's control file does not
+ contain a valid absolute URL. Most probably you forgot to specify
+ the scheme (e.g. http).
+ .
+ This tag is also triggered if the scheme is not known by Lintian.
diff --git a/tags/b/bad-intended-distribution.tag b/tags/b/bad-intended-distribution.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d374420
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/bad-intended-distribution.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+Tag: bad-intended-distribution
+Severity: info
+Check: debian/changelog
+Experimental: yes
+Explanation: The last changelog entry implies this version is not for release.
+    Instead it should specify the distribution it is to be uploaded to.
diff --git a/tags/b/bad-jar-name.tag b/tags/b/bad-jar-name.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..cc73868
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/bad-jar-name.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
+Tag: bad-jar-name
+Severity: warning
+Check: languages/java
+Explanation: The package ships the specified "public" Jar file under
+ <code>/usr/share/java/</code>, but the name does not correspond to Java policy
+ guidelines. This can cause tools in the Debian Java toolchain to fail.
+See-Also:
+ java-policy 2.4,
+ Bug#976681
diff --git a/tags/b/bad-menu-file-name.tag b/tags/b/bad-menu-file-name.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..16c3d3f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/bad-menu-file-name.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+Tag: bad-menu-file-name
+Severity: error
+Check: menus
+Explanation: The package installs a file as <code>/usr/lib/menu/menu</code>, but that
+ location is reserved for the <code>menu</code> package.
+ .
+ Menu files should be named after the package that installs them.
diff --git a/tags/b/bad-menu-item.tag b/tags/b/bad-menu-item.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..66547b1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/bad-menu-item.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+Tag: bad-menu-item
+Severity: error
+Check: fields/installer-menu-item
+Explanation: The field <code>Installer-Menu-Item</code> should only contain
+ positive integer values.
diff --git a/tags/b/bad-owner-for-doc-file.tag b/tags/b/bad-owner-for-doc-file.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2e52880
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/bad-owner-for-doc-file.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+Tag: bad-owner-for-doc-file
+Severity: error
+Check: documentation
+Explanation: Documentation files should be owned by <code>root/root</code>.
diff --git a/tags/b/bad-package-name.tag b/tags/b/bad-package-name.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6eaa195
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/bad-package-name.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+Tag: bad-package-name
+Severity: error
+Check: fields/package
+Explanation: A package name should be at least two characters long, must consist
+ of the alphanumerics and "+" "-" and ".", and must start with an
+ alphanumeric character.
+See-Also: debian-policy 5.6.7
diff --git a/tags/b/bad-perm-for-file-in-etc-sudoers.d.tag b/tags/b/bad-perm-for-file-in-etc-sudoers.d.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a1f4d40
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/bad-perm-for-file-in-etc-sudoers.d.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+Tag: bad-perm-for-file-in-etc-sudoers.d
+Severity: error
+Check: files/permissions
+Explanation: Files in /etc/sudoers.d/ must be 0440 or sudo will refuse to
+ parse them.
+See-Also: Bug#588831, Bug#576527
diff --git a/tags/b/bad-permissions-for-ali-file.tag b/tags/b/bad-permissions-for-ali-file.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..97ca85e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/bad-permissions-for-ali-file.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
+Tag: bad-permissions-for-ali-file
+Severity: warning
+Check: files/permissions
+See-Also: debian-policy 8.4
+Explanation: Ada Library Information (&ast;.ali) files are required to be read-only
+ (mode 0444) by GNAT.
+ .
+ If at least one user can write the &ast;.ali file, GNAT considers whether
+ or not to recompile the corresponding source file. Such recompilation
+ would fail because normal users don't have write permission on the
+ files. Moreover, such recompilation would defeat the purpose of
+ library packages, which provide &ast;.a and &ast;.so libraries to link against).
diff --git a/tags/b/bad-permissions-for-etc-cron.d-script.tag b/tags/b/bad-permissions-for-etc-cron.d-script.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..476aa29
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/bad-permissions-for-etc-cron.d-script.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+Tag: bad-permissions-for-etc-cron.d-script
+Severity: error
+Check: cron
+Explanation: Files in <code>/etc/cron.d</code> are configuration files for cron and not
+ scripts. Thus, they should not be marked executable.
diff --git a/tags/b/bad-permissions-for-etc-emacs-script.tag b/tags/b/bad-permissions-for-etc-emacs-script.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b907c35
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/bad-permissions-for-etc-emacs-script.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+Tag: bad-permissions-for-etc-emacs-script
+Severity: error
+Check: emacs
+Explanation: Files in the <code>/etc/emacs&ast;</code> directories should not be marked
+ executable.
diff --git a/tags/b/bad-provided-package-name.tag b/tags/b/bad-provided-package-name.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..71f14d7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/bad-provided-package-name.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+Tag: bad-provided-package-name
+Severity: error
+Check: fields/package-relations
+Explanation: A package name should be at least two characters long, must consist
+ of the alphanumerics (lowercase characters only) and "+" "-" and ".", and
+ must start with an alphanumeric character.
+See-Also: debian-policy 5.6.7
diff --git a/tags/b/bad-relation.tag b/tags/b/bad-relation.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..66168d9
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/bad-relation.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+Tag: bad-relation
+Severity: error
+Check: fields/package-relations
+Explanation: The package declares a relationship that could not be parsed according
+ to the rules given in the Policy Manual.
+See-Also: debian-policy 7.1
diff --git a/tags/b/bad-section-in-changes-file.tag b/tags/b/bad-section-in-changes-file.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..00077c7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/bad-section-in-changes-file.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+Tag: bad-section-in-changes-file
+Severity: error
+Check: changes-file
+Explanation: The sections <code>non-free</code> and <code>contrib</code> are no longer
+ valid. Please use section <code>non-free/xxx</code> or
+ <code>contrib/xxx</code> instead.
+See-Also: debian-policy 2.4
diff --git a/tags/b/bad-so-link-within-manual-page.tag b/tags/b/bad-so-link-within-manual-page.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..9781ac5
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/bad-so-link-within-manual-page.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+Tag: bad-so-link-within-manual-page
+Severity: error
+Check: documentation/manual
+Explanation: Manual files that use the .so links to include other pages should
+ only point to a path relative to the top-level manual hierarchy, e.g.
+ .
+ <code>.so man3/boo.1.gz</code>
diff --git a/tags/b/bad-test-in-menu-item.tag b/tags/b/bad-test-in-menu-item.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c8c00f0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/bad-test-in-menu-item.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
+Tag: bad-test-in-menu-item
+Severity: error
+Check: menu-format
+Explanation: The <code>menu</code> file contains an item that does not start
+ with the required text <code>?package(somepackage):</code>.
+ .
+ All menu file lines must test for the existence of a package in that way.
+See-Also:
+ menu-manual 3.2
diff --git a/tags/b/bad-urgency-in-changes-file.tag b/tags/b/bad-urgency-in-changes-file.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2dc45fb
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/bad-urgency-in-changes-file.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
+Tag: bad-urgency-in-changes-file
+Severity: error
+Check: fields/urgency
+Explanation: The keyword value of the "Urgency" field in the .changes file is not
+ one of the allowed values of low, medium, high, critical, and emergency
+ (case-insensitive). This value normally taken from the first line of the
+ most recent entry in <code>debian/changelog</code>, which is probably where
+ the error is.
+See-Also: debian-policy 5.6.17
diff --git a/tags/b/bad-version-in-relation.tag b/tags/b/bad-version-in-relation.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8b1b43b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/bad-version-in-relation.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+Tag: bad-version-in-relation
+See-Also: debian-policy 5.6.12
+Severity: error
+Check: fields/package-relations
+Explanation: The version number used in this relationship does not match the
+ defined format of a version number.
diff --git a/tags/b/bad-version-number.tag b/tags/b/bad-version-number.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7b94629
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/bad-version-number.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+Tag: bad-version-number
+Severity: error
+Check: fields/version
+Explanation: The version number fails one of the syntactic requirements of dpkg.
+See-Also: debian-policy 5.6.12
diff --git a/tags/b/bad-whatis-entry.tag b/tags/b/bad-whatis-entry.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..0c4c823
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/bad-whatis-entry.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
+Tag: bad-whatis-entry
+Severity: warning
+Check: documentation/manual
+Renamed-From: manpage-has-bad-whatis-entry
+Explanation: A manual page should start with a <code>NAME</code> section, which
+ lists the program name and a brief description. The <code>NAME</code>
+ section is used to generate a database that can be queried by commands
+ like <code>apropos</code> and <code>whatis</code>. You are seeing this tag
+ because <code>lexgrog</code> was unable to parse the <code>NAME</code> section.
+ .
+ Manual pages for multiple programs, functions, or files should list each
+ separated by a comma and a space, followed by <code>\-</code> and a common
+ description.
+ .
+ Listed items may not contain any spaces. A manual page for a two-level
+ command such as <code>fs listacl</code> must look like <code>fs&lowbar;listacl</code>
+ so the list is read correctly.
+See-Also: lexgrog(1), groff_man(7), groff_mdoc(7)
diff --git a/tags/b/bash-completion-with-hashbang.tag b/tags/b/bash-completion-with-hashbang.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f36a3e5
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/bash-completion-with-hashbang.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
+Tag: bash-completion-with-hashbang
+Severity: warning
+Check: shell/bash/completion
+Explanation: This file starts with the #! sequence that marks interpreted scripts,
+ but it is a bash completion script that is merely intended to be sourced.
+ .
+ Please remove the line with hashbang, including any designated interpreter.
+See-Also:
+ https://salsa.debian.org/lintian/lintian/-/merge_requests/292#note_139494
diff --git a/tags/b/bash-term-in-posix-shell.tag b/tags/b/bash-term-in-posix-shell.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ea13328
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/bash-term-in-posix-shell.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+Tag: bash-term-in-posix-shell
+Severity: info
+Check: shell/non-posix/bash-centric
+Explanation: This script is marked as running under <code>/bin/sh</code>, but it seems
+ to use a feature found in bash but not in the SUSv3 or POSIX shell
+ specification.
+ .
+ Some examples are:
+ .
+ - <code>==</code> in a test, it should use <code>=</code> instead
+ - <code>read</code> without a variable in the argument
+ - <code>function</code> to define a function
+ - <code>source</code> instead of <code>.</code>
+ - <code>. command args</code>, passing arguments to commands via <code>source</code> is not supported
+ - <code>{foo,bar}</code> instead of <code>foo bar</code>
+ - <code>[[ test ]]</code> instead of <code>[ test ]</code> (requires a Korn shell)
+ - <code>type</code> instead of <code>which</code> or <code>command -v</code>
diff --git a/tags/b/bin-sbin-mismatch.tag b/tags/b/bin-sbin-mismatch.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2dc0ea3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/bin-sbin-mismatch.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+Tag: bin-sbin-mismatch
+Severity: info
+Check: files/contents
+Experimental: yes
+Explanation: The package installs a binary under <code>/usr/sbin</code> or
+ <code>/sbin</code> but the specified file or maintainer script appears to
+ incorrectly reference it under <code>/usr/bin</code> or <code>/bin</code>.
+ .
+ This is likely due to the maintainer identifying that the package
+ requires root privileges or similar and thus installing the files to
+ the <code>sbin</code> variant, but the package has not been comprehensively
+ or completely updated to match.
+ .
+ For ELF files, false positives could be related to the <code>SHF&lowbar;MERGE</code>
+ option to <code>ld</code>. The option saves space by providing different
+ start indices into the same static location in object files.
+ Unfortunately, the sub-string information is lost in that process.
diff --git a/tags/b/binaries-have-file-conflict.tag b/tags/b/binaries-have-file-conflict.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a5c111c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/binaries-have-file-conflict.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+Tag: binaries-have-file-conflict
+Severity: warning
+Check: group-checks
+Experimental: no
+Explanation: The binaries appears to have overlapping files without proper
+ conflicts relation.
+ .
+ Note the check is completely based on the file index for the
+ packages. Possible known false-positives include dpkg-diverts in
+ maintainer scripts.
diff --git a/tags/b/binary-arch-rules-but-pkg-is-arch-indep.tag b/tags/b/binary-arch-rules-but-pkg-is-arch-indep.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8de0142
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/binary-arch-rules-but-pkg-is-arch-indep.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+Tag: binary-arch-rules-but-pkg-is-arch-indep
+Severity: warning
+Check: debian/rules
+Explanation: It looks like you try to run code in the binary-arch target of 
+ <code>debian/rules</code>, even though your package is architecture-
+ independent.
diff --git a/tags/b/binary-compiled-with-profiling-enabled.tag b/tags/b/binary-compiled-with-profiling-enabled.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8d4f537
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/binary-compiled-with-profiling-enabled.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+Tag: binary-compiled-with-profiling-enabled
+Severity: warning
+Check: binaries/profiling
+Explanation: Profiling is useful for testing and debugging, but running
+ this program will leave around files named <code>gmon.out</code>.
+ .
+ You should probably disable profiling, or perhaps override the tag.
diff --git a/tags/b/binary-file-built-without-LFS-support.tag b/tags/b/binary-file-built-without-LFS-support.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d9e2c2a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/binary-file-built-without-LFS-support.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
+Tag: binary-file-built-without-LFS-support
+Severity: info
+Check: binaries/large-file-support
+Experimental: yes
+Explanation: The listed ELF binary appears to be (partially) built without
+ "Large File Support" (LFS). If so, it may not be able to handle large
+ files or files with large metadata values, such as inode numbers, correctly.
+ .
+ To support large files, code review might be needed to make sure that
+ those files are not slurped into memory or mmap(2)ed, and that correct
+ 64-bit data types are used (ex: <code>off&lowbar;t</code> instead of <code>ssize&lowbar;t</code>), etc. Once
+ that has been done ensure <code>&lowbar;FILE&lowbar;OFFSET&lowbar;BITS</code> is defined and
+ set to 64 before any system headers are included (note that on systems
+ were the ABI has LFS enabled by default, setting <code>&lowbar;FILE&lowbar;OFFSET&lowbar;BITS</code>
+ to 64 will be a no-op, and as such optional). This can be done by using
+ the <code>AC&lowbar;SYS&lowbar;LARGEFILE</code> macro with autoconf which will set any
+ macro required to enable LFS when necessary, or by enabling the
+ <code>lfs</code> feature from the <code>future</code> dpkg-buildflags feature
+ area which sets the <code>CPPFLAGS</code> variable (since dpkg-dev 1.19.0).
+ Note though, that <code>getconf LFS&lowbar;CFLAGS</code> must not be used,
+ as it does not support cross-building. Using
+ <code>&lowbar;FILE&lowbar;OFFSET&lowbar;BITS</code> should require no system function renames (eg.
+ from open(2) to open64(2)), and if this tag is still emitted, the most
+ probable cause is because the macro is not seen by the system code being
+ compiled.
+ .
+ Take into account that even if this tag is not emitted, that does not
+ mean the binary is LFS-safe (ie. no OOM conditions, file truncation
+ or overwrite will happen).
+ .
+ Also note that enabling LFS on a shared library is not always safe as
+ it might break ABI in case some of the exported types change size, in
+ those cases a SOVERSION bump might be required. Or alternatively, on
+ systems with an ABI without LFS, defining <code>&lowbar;LARGEFILE64&lowbar;SOURCE</code>
+ and exporting both 32 and 64-bit variants of the interfaces can avoid
+ the SOVERSION bump, at the cost of more complex maintenance.
+See-Also: http://www.unix.org/version2/whatsnew/lfs20mar.html,
+ https://www.gnu.org/software/libc/manual/html_node/Feature-Test-Macros.html
diff --git a/tags/b/binary-from-other-architecture.tag b/tags/b/binary-from-other-architecture.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..780b63a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/binary-from-other-architecture.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+Tag: binary-from-other-architecture
+Severity: error
+Check: binaries/architecture/other
+Explanation: This ELF binary appears to have been built for an architecture other
+ than the one of the binary package being tested. This may occur when a
+ pre-built binary is shipped in the package or when an attempt to
+ cross-compile didn't work.
diff --git a/tags/b/binary-has-unneeded-section.tag b/tags/b/binary-has-unneeded-section.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..5ed4ead
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/binary-has-unneeded-section.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+Tag: binary-has-unneeded-section
+Severity: info
+Check: binaries
+Explanation: The binary or shared library is stripped, but still contains a
+ section that is not useful. You should call strip with
+ <code>--remove-section=.comment --remove-section=.note</code> to remove the
+ <code>.note</code> and <code>.comment</code> sections.
+ .
+ <code>dh&lowbar;strip</code> will do this automatically for you, but
+ <code>install -s</code> will not because it calls strip without any
+ arguments.
diff --git a/tags/b/binary-in-etc.tag b/tags/b/binary-in-etc.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8e3f4d7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/binary-in-etc.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+Tag: binary-in-etc
+Severity: error
+Check: binaries/location
+Explanation: This package installs an ELF binary in <code>/etc</code>. The
+ Filesystem Hierarchy Standard forbids it.
+See-Also: filesystem-hierarchy etchostspecificsystemconfiguration
diff --git a/tags/b/binary-nmu-debian-revision-in-source.tag b/tags/b/binary-nmu-debian-revision-in-source.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7f72994
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/binary-nmu-debian-revision-in-source.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
+Tag: binary-nmu-debian-revision-in-source
+Severity: warning
+Check: fields/version
+See-Also: developer-reference 5.10.2.1
+Explanation: The version number of your source package ends in +b and a number or
+ has a Debian revision containing three parts. These version numbers are
+ used by binary NMUs and should not be used as the source version. (The
+ +b form is the current standard; the three-part version number now
+ obsolete.)
diff --git a/tags/b/binary-package-depends-on-toolchain-package.tag b/tags/b/binary-package-depends-on-toolchain-package.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..73b484d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/binary-package-depends-on-toolchain-package.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
+Tag: binary-package-depends-on-toolchain-package
+Severity: warning
+Check: fields/package-relations
+Explanation: This package specifies a binary dependency on a "toolchain" package
+ such as debhelper or cdbs. This is likely to be a mistake; these
+ packages are typically specified as build-dependencies instead.
+ .
+ If the package intentionally requires such a dependency, please add a
+ Lintian override with a justifying remark.
diff --git a/tags/b/binary-with-bad-dynamic-table.tag b/tags/b/binary-with-bad-dynamic-table.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..eea6e30
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/binary-with-bad-dynamic-table.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+Tag: binary-with-bad-dynamic-table
+Severity: error
+Check: binaries/corrupted
+Explanation: This appears to be an ELF file. According to readelf, the
+ program headers suggests it should have a dynamic section, but
+ readelf cannot find it.
+ .
+ If it is meant to be external debugging symbols for another file,
+ it should be installed under /usr/lib/debug. Otherwise, this
+ could be a corrupt ELF file.
diff --git a/tags/b/bogus-mail-host-in-debian-changelog.tag b/tags/b/bogus-mail-host-in-debian-changelog.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d345573
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/bogus-mail-host-in-debian-changelog.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+Tag: bogus-mail-host-in-debian-changelog
+Severity: error
+Check: debian/changelog
+Renamed-From: debian-changelog-file-contains-invalid-email-address
+Explanation: The changelog file contains an invalid email address: the domain
+ needs at least one dot. This looks like a mistake.
diff --git a/tags/b/bogus-mail-host.tag b/tags/b/bogus-mail-host.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6474bbc
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/bogus-mail-host.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
+Tag: bogus-mail-host
+Severity: error
+Check: fields/mail-address
+Renamed-From:
+ maintainer-address-is-on-localhost
+ uploader-address-is-on-localhost
+ changed-by-address-is-on-localhost
+Explanation: The host part of the named contact address is not known or not
+ globally routables, such as localhost(.localdomain).
+See-Also: debian-policy 5.6.2,
+ debian-policy 5.6.3,
+ debian-policy 5.6.4
diff --git a/tags/b/bogus-python-prerequisite.tag b/tags/b/bogus-python-prerequisite.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..47ee660
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/bogus-python-prerequisite.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+Tag: bogus-python-prerequisite
+Severity: error
+Check: languages/python/bogus-prerequisites
+Experimental: yes
+Explanation: This Python package declares an invalid prerequisite.
+ For example, packages should not refer to any of the <code>what-is-python</code>
+ packages in the source field for <code>Build-Depends</code>, or in the binary
+ fields for <code>Depends</code> or <code>Recommends</code>.
+See-Also:
+ Bug#973011
diff --git a/tags/b/boilerplate-copyright-format-uri.tag b/tags/b/boilerplate-copyright-format-uri.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..dc7a175
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/boilerplate-copyright-format-uri.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+Tag: boilerplate-copyright-format-uri
+Severity: warning
+Check: debian/copyright/dep5
+Explanation: Format URI of the machine-readable copyright file contains
+ <code>VERSIONED&lowbar;FORMAT&lowbar;URL</code> or <code>REVISION</code> string. Please replace it
+ with an actual URI or an actual revision number respectively.
diff --git a/tags/b/boolean-template-has-bogus-default.tag b/tags/b/boolean-template-has-bogus-default.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6eaa537
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/boolean-template-has-bogus-default.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
+Tag: boolean-template-has-bogus-default
+Severity: error
+Check: debian/debconf
+Explanation: The <code>boolean</code> type in a Debconf template can have
+ only one of two values: <code>true</code> or <code>false</code>. This
+ template tries to use something else as the default value.
+See-Also:
+ debconf-specification 3.1,
+ debconf-devel(7)
diff --git a/tags/b/brace-expansion-in-debhelper-config-file.tag b/tags/b/brace-expansion-in-debhelper-config-file.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1e6aea7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/brace-expansion-in-debhelper-config-file.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
+Tag: brace-expansion-in-debhelper-config-file
+Severity: warning
+Check: debhelper
+Explanation: This debhelper config file appears to use shell brace expansion
+ (such as <code>{foo,bar}</code>) to specify files. This happens to work due
+ to an accident of implementation but is not a supported feature. Only
+ <code>?</code>, <code>&ast;</code>, and <code>[...]</code> are supported.
+See-Also: debhelper(1)
diff --git a/tags/b/breaks-without-version.tag b/tags/b/breaks-without-version.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1681670
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/breaks-without-version.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+Tag: breaks-without-version
+Severity: warning
+Check: fields/package-relations
+See-Also: debian-policy 7.3, debian-policy 7.4, Bug#605744
+Explanation: This package declares a Breaks relationship with another package
+ that has no version number. Normally, Breaks should be used to indicate
+ an incompatibility with a specific version of another package, or with
+ all versions predating a fix. If the two packages can never be installed
+ at the same time, Conflicts should normally be used instead.
+ .
+ Note this tag can also be issued if a package has been split into two
+ completely new ones. In this case, this package is missing a Replaces
+ on the old package.
diff --git a/tags/b/broken-bz2.tag b/tags/b/broken-bz2.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4e32d86
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/broken-bz2.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+Tag: broken-bz2
+Severity: warning
+Check: files/compressed/bz2
+Explanation: The given file ends with <code>.bz2</code>, which normally indicates it
+ was compressed with bzip2. However, it doesn't seem to be an
+ bz2-compressed file.
diff --git a/tags/b/broken-gz.tag b/tags/b/broken-gz.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7c19445
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/broken-gz.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+Tag: broken-gz
+Severity: warning
+Check: files/compressed/gz
+Explanation: The given file ends with <code>.gz</code>, which normally indicates it
+ was compressed with gzip. However, it doesn't seem to be a
+ gzip-compressed file.
diff --git a/tags/b/broken-link-to-undocumented.tag b/tags/b/broken-link-to-undocumented.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4903f3b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/broken-link-to-undocumented.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+Tag: broken-link-to-undocumented
+Severity: error
+Check: documentation/manual
+Renamed-From: bad-link-to-undocumented-manpage
+Explanation: The symbolic link should reference
+ "<code>../man[237]/undocumented.[237].gz</code>" for manual pages in
+ <code>/usr/share/man</code>.
diff --git a/tags/b/broken-lz.tag b/tags/b/broken-lz.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..604afd3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/broken-lz.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+Tag: broken-lz
+Severity: warning
+Check: files/compressed/lz
+Explanation: The given file ends with <code>.lz</code>, which normally indicates it
+ was compressed with lz. However, it doesn't seem to be an
+ lz-compressed file.
diff --git a/tags/b/broken-lzma.tag b/tags/b/broken-lzma.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..205b613
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/broken-lzma.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+Tag: broken-lzma
+Severity: warning
+Check: files/compressed/lzma
+Explanation: The given file ends with <code>.lzma</code>, which normally indicates it
+ was compressed with lzma. However, it doesn't seem to be an
+ lzma-compressed file.
diff --git a/tags/b/broken-lzo.tag b/tags/b/broken-lzo.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6709bdd
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/broken-lzo.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+Tag: broken-lzo
+Severity: warning
+Check: files/compressed/lzo
+Explanation: The given file ends with <code>.lzo</code>, which normally indicates it
+ was compressed with lzop. However, it doesn't seem to be an
+ lz-compressed file.
diff --git a/tags/b/broken-xz.tag b/tags/b/broken-xz.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..15f2ac4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/broken-xz.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+Tag: broken-xz
+Severity: warning
+Check: files/compressed/xz
+Explanation: The given file ends with <code>.xz</code>, which normally indicates it
+ is compressed with xz. However, it doesn't seem to be an
+ xz-compressed file.
diff --git a/tags/b/broken-zip.tag b/tags/b/broken-zip.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..bf7161a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/broken-zip.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+Tag: broken-zip
+Severity: warning
+Check: files/compressed/zip
+Explanation: The given file ends with <code>.zip</code>, which normally indicates it
+ was compressed with zip. However, it doesn't seem to be a
+ zip-compressed file.
diff --git a/tags/b/bugs-field-does-not-refer-to-debian-infrastructure.tag b/tags/b/bugs-field-does-not-refer-to-debian-infrastructure.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ea76090
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/bugs-field-does-not-refer-to-debian-infrastructure.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
+Tag: bugs-field-does-not-refer-to-debian-infrastructure
+Severity: warning
+Check: fields/bugs
+Explanation: The <code>debian/control</code> file contains a Bugs field that does
+ not refer to Debian infrastructure. This is recognized by the string
+ ".debian.org".
+ .
+ This is likely to make reportbug(1) unable to report bugs.
+See-Also: Bug#740944
diff --git a/tags/b/build-conflicts-with-build-dependency.tag b/tags/b/build-conflicts-with-build-dependency.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..32ff6b5
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/build-conflicts-with-build-dependency.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+Tag: build-conflicts-with-build-dependency
+Severity: error
+Check: fields/package-relations
+See-Also: debian-policy 7.7
+Explanation: The package build-conflicts with a package that it also
+ build-depends on.
diff --git a/tags/b/build-depends-arch-without-arch-dependent-binary.tag b/tags/b/build-depends-arch-without-arch-dependent-binary.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4b56db2
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/build-depends-arch-without-arch-dependent-binary.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+Tag: build-depends-arch-without-arch-dependent-binary
+Severity: error
+Check: fields/package-relations
+Explanation: The control file specifies source relations for architecture-dependent
+ packages, but no architecture-dependent packages are built.
diff --git a/tags/b/build-depends-indep-without-arch-indep.tag b/tags/b/build-depends-indep-without-arch-indep.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6c9a0b5
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/build-depends-indep-without-arch-indep.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+Tag: build-depends-indep-without-arch-indep
+Severity: error
+Check: fields/package-relations
+See-Also: debian-policy 7.7
+Explanation: The control file specifies source relations for architecture-independent
+ packages, but no architecture-independent packages are built.
diff --git a/tags/b/build-depends-on-1-revision.tag b/tags/b/build-depends-on-1-revision.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2673e2a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/build-depends-on-1-revision.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+Tag: build-depends-on-1-revision
+Severity: warning
+Check: fields/package-relations
+Explanation: The package declares a build dependency on a version of a package
+ with a -1 Debian revision such as "libfoo (&gt;= 1.2-1)". Such a
+ dependency will not be satisfied by a backport of libfoo 1.2-1 and
+ therefore makes backporting unnecessarily difficult. Normally, the -1
+ version is unneeded and a dependency such as "libfoo (&gt;= 1.2)" would
+ be sufficient. If there was an earlier -0.X version of libfoo that would
+ not satisfy the dependency, use "libfoo (&gt;= 1.2-1~)" instead.
diff --git a/tags/b/build-depends-on-an-obsolete-java-package.tag b/tags/b/build-depends-on-an-obsolete-java-package.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..91c5e5a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/build-depends-on-an-obsolete-java-package.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+Tag: build-depends-on-an-obsolete-java-package
+Severity: warning
+Check: fields/package-relations
+See-Also: java-policy 2.2
+Explanation: The package build-depends on an obsolete Java dependency.
+ It should build-depend on default-jdk instead.
diff --git a/tags/b/build-depends-on-build-essential-package-without-using-version.tag b/tags/b/build-depends-on-build-essential-package-without-using-version.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a8a3b79
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/build-depends-on-build-essential-package-without-using-version.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+Tag: build-depends-on-build-essential-package-without-using-version
+Severity: error
+Check: fields/package-relations
+See-Also: debian-policy 4.2
+Explanation: The package declares a build-depends on a build essential package
+ without using a versioned depends. Packages do not have to depend on any
+ package included in build-essential. It is the responsibility of anyone
+ building packages to have all build-essential packages installed. The
+ only reason for an explicit dependency on a package included in
+ build-essential is if a particular version of that package is required,
+ in which case the dependency should include the version.
+Renamed-From:
+ depends-on-build-essential-package-without-using-version
diff --git a/tags/b/build-depends-on-build-essential.tag b/tags/b/build-depends-on-build-essential.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..9165239
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/build-depends-on-build-essential.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+Tag: build-depends-on-build-essential
+Explanation: You depend on the build-essential package, which is only a
+ metapackage depending on build tools that have to be installed in all
+ build environments.
+Severity: error
+Check: fields/package-relations
+See-Also: debian-policy 7.7
diff --git a/tags/b/build-depends-on-essential-package-without-using-version.tag b/tags/b/build-depends-on-essential-package-without-using-version.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8a91ab2
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/build-depends-on-essential-package-without-using-version.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+Tag: build-depends-on-essential-package-without-using-version
+Severity: error
+Check: fields/package-relations
+See-Also: debian-policy 4.2
+Explanation: The package declares a build-depends on an essential package, e.g. dpkg,
+ without using a versioned depends. Packages do not need to build-depend on
+ essential packages; essential means that they will always be present.
+ The only reason to list an explicit dependency on an essential package
+ is if you need a particular version of that package, in which case the
+ version should be given in the dependency.
diff --git a/tags/b/build-depends-on-metapackage.tag b/tags/b/build-depends-on-metapackage.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7a1d8a1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/build-depends-on-metapackage.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+Tag: build-depends-on-metapackage
+Severity: error
+Check: fields/package-relations
+Explanation: Packages must not build-depend on metapackages.
+ .
+ Metapackages such as xorg, xorg-dev, x-window-system,
+ x-window-system-dev and x-window-system-core exist only for the
+ benefit of users and should not be used in package build
+ dependencies.
+See-Also: https://wiki.debian.org/Lintian/Tags/depends-on-metapackage
diff --git a/tags/b/build-depends-on-non-build-package.tag b/tags/b/build-depends-on-non-build-package.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b13cdc3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/build-depends-on-non-build-package.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
+Tag: build-depends-on-non-build-package
+Severity: error
+Check: fields/package-relations
+Explanation: The package declares a build dependency on a package that is not
+ appropriate for build dependencies, usually because it's only for
+ interactive use or cannot be correctly installed in a build environment.
+ See the description or documentation of the package for more
+ information.
diff --git a/tags/b/build-depends-on-obsolete-package.tag b/tags/b/build-depends-on-obsolete-package.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d8018a7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/build-depends-on-obsolete-package.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+Tag: build-depends-on-obsolete-package
+Severity: warning
+Check: fields/package-relations
+Explanation: The package build-depends on a package that has been superseded.
+ If the superseded package is part of an ORed group, it should not be
+ the first package in the group.
diff --git a/tags/b/build-depends-on-python-dev-with-no-arch-any.tag b/tags/b/build-depends-on-python-dev-with-no-arch-any.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..bfba2aa
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/build-depends-on-python-dev-with-no-arch-any.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
+Tag: build-depends-on-python-dev-with-no-arch-any
+Severity: info
+Check: fields/package-relations
+Explanation: The given package appears to have a Python development package
+ (<code>python3-dev</code>, <code>python3-all-dev</code> or
+ <code>pythonX.Y-dev</code>) listed in its <code>Build-Depends</code> or
+ <code>Build-Depends-Indep</code> fields, but only <code>Architecture: all</code>
+ packages are built by this source package. Python applications and modules
+ do not usually require those dev packages, so you should consider removing
+ them in favour of <code>python3</code>, <code>python3-all</code>
+ or <code>pythonX.Y</code>.
+ .
+ If you are building a Python extension instead, you should have
+ development packages listed in <code>Build-Depends</code>, but normally there should
+ be at least one <code>Architecture: any</code> package.
diff --git a/tags/b/build-depends-on-python-sphinx-only.tag b/tags/b/build-depends-on-python-sphinx-only.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..18b7e6b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/build-depends-on-python-sphinx-only.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+Tag: build-depends-on-python-sphinx-only
+Severity: warning
+Check: languages/python
+Explanation: This package Build-Depends on the Python 2.x version of the Sphinx
+ documentation generator.
+ .
+ The 2.x series of Python is due for deprecation and will not be maintained
+ by upstream past 2020 and will likely be dropped after the release of
+ Debian "buster".
+ .
+ Some Python modules may need to depend on both <code>python-sphinx</code> and
+ <code>python3-sphinx</code> but please consider moving to only Build-Depending on
+ the <code>python3-sphinx</code> package instead.
diff --git a/tags/b/build-depends-on-specific-java-doc-package.tag b/tags/b/build-depends-on-specific-java-doc-package.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b9e0290
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/build-depends-on-specific-java-doc-package.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+Tag: build-depends-on-specific-java-doc-package
+Severity: warning
+Check: fields/package-relations
+Explanation: The given package declares a build dependency on either openjdk-
+ X-doc or classpath-doc instead of using default-jdk-doc. default-jdk-doc
+ provides a symlink to the API via /usr/share/default-jdk-doc/api.
diff --git a/tags/b/build-depends-on-versioned-berkeley-db.tag b/tags/b/build-depends-on-versioned-berkeley-db.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e1de3c4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/build-depends-on-versioned-berkeley-db.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+Tag: build-depends-on-versioned-berkeley-db
+Severity: warning
+Check: fields/package-relations
+Explanation: The package build-depends on a versioned development package of
+ Berkeley DB (libdbX.Y-dev) instead of versionless package
+ (libdb-dev). Unfortunately this prevents binNMUs when default
+ Berkeley DB version changes.
+ .
+ Unless the package absolutely have to depend on specific Berkeley DB
+ version, it should build-depends on libdb-dev. For more information
+ on the upgrade process, please see the references.
+ .
+ The package can usually be made Berkeley DB version agnostic by the
+ following steps:
+ .
+  1. note the version of Berkeley DB used to compile the package on build time
+  2. on first install copy the used version to active version
+  3. on upgrades compare the versions and if they differ do the upgrade procedure
+ .
+ If you are unsure you can contact Berkeley DB maintainer, who would be
+ glad to help.
+ .
+ Should the package have a legitimate reason for using the versioned development
+ package, please add an override.
+See-Also: http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E17076_02/html/upgrading/upgrade_process.html
diff --git a/tags/b/build-path-in-manual.tag b/tags/b/build-path-in-manual.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e7c2093
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/build-path-in-manual.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
+Tag: build-path-in-manual
+Severity: error
+Check: documentation/manual
+Renamed-From: manpage-named-after-build-path
+Explanation: The manual page appears to be named after its build path and
+ not after its content.
+ .
+ Please check your debian/rules or upstream Makefile.
diff --git a/tags/b/build-prerequisite-in-installable-section.tag b/tags/b/build-prerequisite-in-installable-section.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b3ee66e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/build-prerequisite-in-installable-section.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+Tag: build-prerequisite-in-installable-section
+Severity: error
+Check: debian/control/field/misplaced
+Renamed-From:
+ build-info-in-binary-control-file-section
+Explanation: The named field appears in an installable section of the
+ <code>debian/control</code> file, but the field declares a relationship
+ between sources.
+ .
+ The field should only appear in the source section of the <code>debian/control</code>
+ file.
+See-Also:
+ debian-policy 5.2
diff --git a/tags/b/built-using-field-on-arch-all-package.tag b/tags/b/built-using-field-on-arch-all-package.tag
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d8cca62
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tags/b/built-using-field-on-arch-all-package.tag
@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
+Tag: built-using-field-on-arch-all-package
+Severity: info
+Check: debian/control/field/built-using
+Explanation: The stanza for an installation package in <code>debian/control</code>
+ declares a <code>Built-Using</code> field even though the package is declared as
+ <code>Architecture: all</code>. That is incorrect.
+ .
+ The <code>Built-Using</code> field is only used architecture-specific packages.
+ Please remove the <code>Built-Using</code> field from the indicated location.