Hi! Thanks for your review of it quickly.
On Tue, Apr 9, 2024 at 2:18 PM Stéphane Glondu <glo...@debian.org> wrote: > > Dear Bo, > > Le 08/04/2024 à 17:05, Bo YU a écrit : > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "bisect-ppx": > > [...] > > I've reviewed the packaging and I have a few comments. > > Standards-Version is not the latest. Now is the latest Standards-Version 4.7.0? Just noticed the announcement from the d-announcement mail list some days ago. > > Upstream copyright years are missing in debian/copyright. > > A .cma file is in a "OPT:" line in an .install.in file. Both above are easy to fix for me.:) > > I would not override dh_dwz nor dh_strip. My opinion is that what you > are trying to fix are deficiencies of the toolchain that should be fixed > there. Here I want to get some help with how to fix the issue. In your view, which toolchain is the most likely cause of this problem? I mean dh_* or just bisect-ppx build toolchain itself. For these OCaml packages I packaged in the past weeks, it was about two packages has the same issue. This will cost more time given I known a little about OCaml but I will fix the issue definitely. > > It is not right to override source-contains-prebuilt-javascript-object > in this case; you should filter the .js file out and make sure the > package works without it. Or get the actual sources and build from them. > Or find it in another Debian package. (These are just examples of how to > tackle the issue.) I think repacking it should be fixed the issue, but is it overuse? Is it possible has another solution to fix it? like this[0] to be noticed when I was trying to fix another ftbfs issue. [0]: https://salsa.debian.org/ocaml-team/opam/-/blob/master/debian/gbp.conf?ref_type=heads#L4 > > I am wondering about long-term maintainability of the manpage. I suppose > you've generated the manpage from running the command with --help? > Please make a rule to automatically generate it. > Ok, got it. Thanks for your time again. I will fix these issue ASAP. BR, Bo
