#1140488 overzealous speling fixes

Package:
debcraft
Source:
debcraft
Submitter:
Marc Haber
Date:
2026-06-21 19:11:02 UTC
Severity:
normal
#1140488#5
Date:
2026-06-21 11:58:04 UTC
From:
To:
Hi,

this is an excerpt of debcraft's changes to adduser:
--- a/debian/copyright
+++ b/debian/copyright
-           2004 Claus Hindsgaul <claus_h@image.dk>
+           2004 Clause Hindsgaul <claus_h@image.dk>

--- a/debian/tests/lib/AdduserTestsCommon.pm
+++ b/debian/tests/lib/AdduserTestsCommon.pm
-    isnt($? >> 8, 0, "command failure (expected): @_");
+    isn't($? >> 8, 0, "command failure (expected): @_");
(repeated for every assertion using isnt)

Greetings
Marc
#1140488#10
Date:
2026-06-21 13:41:50 UTC
From:
To:
Hi,

This is how codespell works. You could either try to influence upstream
codespell to be smarter in what type of context it skips, or use a .
codespellrc to skip these "fixes".
#1140488#15
Date:
2026-06-21 14:38:00 UTC
From:
To:
No offense intended, I'd rather ditch debcraft. Can codespell be
completely disabled in debcraft? I don't need a tool that creates three
false positives for one useful fix.

Greetings
Marc
#1140488#20
Date:
2026-06-21 17:52:45 UTC
From:
To:
Personally I do a lot of typos and also see Lintian often nag about typos,
so I think some spell checking is useful.

Alternatives to codespell would be spellintian, or debputy --spellcheck,
but in my experience they have more false positives and no mechanism to
override such occurrences.

Suggestions how to implement a better spell checking (and automatic fixing)
are welcome. I don't think removing it completely would be a satisfactory
solution to the need.
#1140488#25
Date:
2026-06-21 19:09:23 UTC
From:
To:
I do fully agree.

"Fixing" function and person's names is not useful.

So it's going to be a "debcraft; git reset" workflow in the future.

Greetings
Marc