2011/8/4 Benoît Knecht <benoit.kne...@fsfe.org> > John R. Baskwill wrote: > > 2011/8/4 Benoît Knecht <benoit.kne...@fsfe.org> > > > [...] > > > > > > From a quick look at your package: > > > > > > - You have a debian/patches/debian-changes-1.4.0-1 patch that is > > > probably not intentional. >
You are correct. That was not intentional. The patch has been removed. > > > > > > - It would be great if you could use DEP-5 [1] for your > > > debian/copyright. > > > > > > [1] http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep5/ > > > > I believe the format is correct for DEP-5 now. > > > Also, if you run 'licensecheck -r .' in the root directory of your > > > package, you'll notice that some files lack a copyright header. You > > > should probably contact upstream about that and make sure that all > > > the files are indeed released under the LGPL. > > > > I emailed upstream to ask whether all of the source files were covered by the LGPL, and not just the files with a copyright header. This was Olivier Festor's (one of ndpmon's contacts) reply: Absolutely ALL files of NDPMon are LGPL. So I believe everything is fine from a licensing standpoint. > > > - 'lintian -I --pedantic ndpmon_1.4.0-2_*.changes' had this to say: > > > > > > W: ndpmon source: configure-generated-file-in-source config.status > > > W: ndpmon source: configure-generated-file-in-source config.cache > > > W: ndpmon source: configure-generated-file-in-source config.log > These files are included in the original tarball. I modified the clean target to remove these files, and also included lintian overrides for the files. I will suggest to upstream to not include these files in the future. I do have one question about the tarball, though. The file I downloaded was named ndpmon-1.4.0.tgz. Everything I read about packaging seemed to assume the tarball would be named ndpmon-1.4.0.tar.gz, so I renamed the file. Is that permissible, or should I have left the name as it was? > > > W: ndpmon source: out-of-date-standards-version 3.9.1 (current is > > > 3.9.2) > My lintian says the current standard is 3.9.1, but OK. > > > I: ndpmon source: debian-watch-contains-dh_make-template > The watch file has been cleaned up. > > > I: ndpmon: spelling-error-in-binary usr/sbin/ndpmon Recieved > Received > > > I: ndpmon: spelling-error-in-binary usr/sbin/ndpmon adress address > > > I: ndpmon: spelling-error-in-binary usr/sbin/ndpmon unkown unknown > > > I: ndpmon: spelling-error-in-binary usr/sbin/ndpmon unkown unknown > > > I: ndpmon: spelling-error-in-binary usr/src/ndpmon/ndpmon.o > Recieved > > > Received > > > I: ndpmon: spelling-error-in-binary usr/src/ndpmon/ndpmon.o adress > > > address > > > I: ndpmon: spelling-error-in-binary usr/src/ndpmon/neighbors.o > unkown > > > unknown > > > I: ndpmon: spelling-error-in-binary usr/src/ndpmon/neighbors.o > unkown > > > unknown > > > E: ndpmon: helper-templates-in-copyright > > > I: ndpmon: spelling-error-in-manpage > usr/share/man/man8/ndpmon.8.gz > > > allows to allows one to > > > > I included patches to correct the spelling errors. The patches have not been sent upstream yet, but I will do that. The copyright file is in DEP5 format. > > > (Run it with '-i' to get a detailed explanation for each warning or > > > error.) > > > > > > - Your .deb contains plenty of .{c,h,o} files, and the full source in > > > /usr/src; I don't think it's what you intended to do, is it? > The installation target has been modified to not install these files. > > > > > > - In debian/control, the description of the package contains > > > information about when, where and by whom the software was > > > developed; I don't think it's relevant here. You also depend > > > explicitly on some libraries, but these should be in > > > ${shlibs:Depends} already if the package links against them. > > > > I removed that section of the description, and remove the explicit dependencies. > > > I hope this helps. Don't hesitate to ask if you have problems/questions > > > about these issues. > > > > Thank you very much for taking the time to look at my package. I will > work > > on the items you listed. > > Great! A couple more things, in case you have too much time on your > hands :) > > - debian/docs: You shouldn't install CHANGES, FILES, MD5SUMS or > VERSION; they're really not useful to the user (except changes, but > it's installed as changelog.gz by dh_installchangelogs already). > > I changed the docs file to include only the README. > - debian/ndpmon.init: Instead of hardcoding variables such as INIT or > LOGDIR, you could source /etc/default/ndpmon (you'd have to create > it in your package) so that users can easily change these paths. > Also, and correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't $"string" a bashism? > > I did as you suggested and included a ndpmon.default file with the default paths for ndpmon. > - debian/{postinst,prerm,postrm} do not do anything, you should remove > them. I also think you can safely remove debian/preinst; the daemon > will be stopped on upgrades by the prerm script generated by > debhelper. > > These files have been removed. > Cheers, > > -- > Benoît Knecht > > > -- > 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/20110804163339.gb3...@marvin.lan > > -- John R. Baskwill, jr...@psu.edu Systems Analyst, Information Technology Services Penn State Harrisburg W303 Olmsted Building 777 West Harrisburg Pike Middletown, PA 17057-4898 Phone: 717-948-6268 Fax: 717-948-6535
