mk-sbuild is untruthful

[Iain Lane]

Binary package hint: ubuntu-dev-tools

mk-sbuild puts a comment in .sbuildrc saying

  # Name to use as override in .changes files for the Maintainer: field
  # (mandatory, no default!).

but this is not true. You can leave that out (and indeed probably should).
sbuild then passes through Maintainer from the package into the changes file.

[Emmet Hikory (persia)]

Rather, it's just outdated. There's some other cruft in there (for instance, the current created sbuild.conf entries will generate deprecation warnings, and they should have been put in conf.d anyway to avoid maintainer script merge issues). I don't know that it's worth fixing it: mk-sbuild should better be folded into sbuild-createchroot.

[Stefano Rivera (stefanor)]

According to persia, this was once necessary. Fixing for now. mk-sbuild will hopefully go away soon ( https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu-dev-tools/+spec/other-o-udt-upstreaming )

[Launchpad Janitor (janitor)]

This bug was fixed in the package ubuntu-dev-tools - 0.124

---------------
ubuntu-dev-tools (0.124) unstable; urgency=low

  [ Benjamin Drung ]
  * Move add-patch, edit-patch, suspicious-source, what-patch, and wrap-and-sort
    from ubuntu-dev-tools into devscripts (Closes: #568481).

  [ Daniel Holbach ]
  * bitesize:
    - display error message properly (LP: #785973).
    - error out if bug is already marked as 'bitesize'.
    - rephrase bug comment and subscribe person who adds the comment.
    - work-around LP:336866 and LP:254901.

  [ Stefano Rivera ]
  * mk-sbuild:
    - maintainer_name isn't mandatory any more (LP: #787051)
 -- Ubuntu Archive Auto-Sync <email address hidden> Thu, 26 May 2011 10:54:47 +0000