On Tuesday, January 05, 2016 04:27:48 AM Tobias Frost wrote: > > Am Montag, den 04.01.2016, 21:29 -0500 schrieb Robert James Clay: > > Some small review. ....
Thanks! > > - Please do not introduce a dbg package -- they are now automatically > generated. .... That came out since my multimail package on mentors was put online at the mentors site. The package doesn't have any reverse depends; so no, it doesn't really need an explicit "-dbg" package anymore. > > - Is the patch forwarded to upstream? The non vendor specific parts of it, you mean? I plan to further discuss other aspects of it with him, yes... I have provided him with the results of package builds but he hasn't commented... > > - Please B-D on debhelper >=9 not debhelper >=9.0 > (The versioned depends could even go, as debhelper 9 is already in since > oldstable) I take your point about its setting, but I think I'd rather keep it explicitly noted... > - d/rules: Are the lines setting CPPFLAGS and friend really needed? As I recall, those were needed to clean up the hardening related lintian errors. > - also, with the drop of the dbg package some overrides can be removed "overrides"? You mean, in d/rules? > - please remove the comments from d/watch I sometimes have relevant info in d/watch file comments, but yes in this case there's really no need for them... RJ Clay j...@rocasa.us