control: tag -1 +moreinfo
control: owner -1 !
Hi Dmitry,
Thank you for this package. Here are some problems found in your package:
1. This package misses dependency libconfig-dev
2. Please fix the lintian warnings. e.g.
W: odp-doc: privacy-breach-generic
3. debhelper compat level and the standards-version is a bit old.
The latest compat is 11, and standards-version is 4.1.4.
See debhelper(7) section COMPATIBILITY LEVELS for compat checklist.
See https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ for the standards upgrading
checklist.
4. Please break the lines whose length exceeds 80 characters in
debian/control and rules.
5. Could you explain why these lines exist? Package libodp-linux-dev
seems not exist.
43 Conflicts: libodp-linux-dev
44 Provides: libodp-linux-dev
also, package libodphelper-dev depends on the non-existing package.
53 Package: libodphelper-dev
54 Architecture: any
55 Section: libdevel
56 Depends: libodphelper119 (= ${binary:Version}),
57 libodp-linux-dev,
6. Must we provide a example package with pre-built binaries shipped?
77 Package: odp-linux-examples
Why can't we put the source of these examples into the doc package?
Or why don't we choose a name such as libodp-tools / libodp-utils
to avoid ambiguity?
7. your patch directory is empty, could you please remove it?
8. Changelog: This is the first-time upload. Could you change the file
so that it looks like this:
PACKAGE (VERSION) UNRELEASED; urgency=low
* Initial release. (Closes: #XXXXXX)
-- maintainer <mail> Thu, 26 Apr 2018 13:06:09 +0000
9. debian/docs This file looks useless ?
10. Why is the package containing
./usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libodp-linux.so.119.0.0
named libodp-generic119?
11. Why is dh_auto_test overrode to empty?
Please feel free to ask if you have any question about
the above points. And have a good day :-)
--
Best,
