Hey Niels, On 15-01-11 23:13, Niels Thykier wrote:
Right, you do not have to paste its contents in twice. You can say something like: "Distributed under the Boost Software License, Version 1.0. See the full text of the license above/below"
fixed that.
Also, the license file is still installed in the -dev package. (see debian/docs). In general, when you have multiple binary packages (like this case), you should use debian/<packagename>.docs (etc.) instead of debian/docs
Ah... yes. I've changed this, the README is now installed by the -dev package only and the LICENSE is not installed any more.
I also upgraded the copyright file to dep5 format.
It would also be cool if the build supported the CFLAGS/LDFLAGS set by dpkg-buildpackage/dpkg-buildflags. This would allow derivatives and users to rebuild the package with different standard flags. A notable example here is Ubuntu, which is currently linking with --no-add-needed and --as-needed. I messed around a bit and the library appears to build just fine with - --no-add-needed (and --no-undefined), so it appears to be properly linked.
Well... that took a bit more work than I expected. Mainly because I had to find out how the dpkg-buildflags tool works and what the format of the buildflags.conf file is supposed to be. Eventually found out by looking at the Perl code. Maybe a man page for the file format could be added.
Anyway, I added support for build-flags. But I used the CFLAGS variable and not the CXXFLAGS one even though my code is C++ only. I'm not sure if this is a problem. The reason I did this is that I guess most people will set CFLAGS and forget about the existence of CXXFLAGS.
I hope I'm getting close now? Best regards, -maarten hekkelman -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4d330254.6090...@cmbi.ru.nl