One more iteration.
On 09/03/16 20:11, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: > On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 09:27:20PM +0000, Jose M Calhariz wrote: >> On 29/02/16 23:09, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: >>> * guessing you are using git-buildpackage, why didn't you just >>> `gbp import-dsc` to import the NMU? >> My changes are older than the NMU. So I did not tried to import the NMU. > umh, yes, otherwise you'd have needed to the re-apply the commits on top > of the import. > >>> * the *.dirs files don't need to list directories for files installed by >>> other dh_* things, so I'm confident at least line 3,4,5 of >>> amanda-server.dirs are useless, haven't looked at the others >> The debian/rules relies on cp and install to copy the files into the >> directories listed in *.dirs >> I don't like, I would prefer the format: >> mkdir $dir && cp $file $dir >> >> What you recomend? > there are several reasons to prefer using dh_* tools to do that. > for the basic example of `mkdir $dir && cp $file $dir` the better way to > do it is to add a .install file with just '$file $dir' and it'll just do > the work. > > That said, I'm now sure that you don't need those lines (as in, I > removed them and it just works, after moving to dh_lintian(1)). > > please try to have a look at all of the things in *.dirs and see if > really them all are needed. there are not many install(1) or cp(1) or > mv(1) calls that needs them (sure, there are other things that do, > though). I managed to remove some lines from *.dirs. > >>> * I'm not happy with the old style rules file, but guess I can't ask >>> that much in this case, and I can live well with it anyway :) >> Thank you. This package is being tested on my backup server for some >> weeks. I don't want >> to make changes that may invalidate my tests. The version 3.3.9 is all >> ready available and I >> can change the rules style for amanda 3.3.9. > ok. > Just, I'd love to show you that several stuff you do manually can be > instead done by some tools that are already there since a lot of times > and really do the job. > * cp of config.{sub,guess}: there is dh_autotools_dev since a lot of > times, since mid-January there is the "native" > dh_update_autotools_config(1) which is also run automatically by > dh(1) > * some of the stuff done in the clean target are done by > dh_auto_clean(1) > * that cp ChangeLog should already be done automatically by > dh_installchangelogs(1) > * all those lines to install lintian should be just done by > dh_lintian(1) (just rename the *.lintian to *.lintian-overrides); for > avoidance of doubts, this one thing I want to see changed, the other > can wait for the time you'll rewrite the thing :) > >> This is for today. > yeah, one step at time. > > Some more things from d/rules: > > * that $(shell pwd) can be $(CURDIR) Done > * you should remove the config.{sub,guess} you copy over Done > * what's that "source diff" target?? seams some old things that does > nothing now, maybe it can be removed? Done > * do you know why dh_makeshlibs is called with --noscripts? It silence a lintian warning "amanda-common: postinst-has-useless-call-to-ldconfig" > * the -l of that dh_shlibdeps should be uneeded. Done > * that fiddling with substvars seems to be uneeded: whilst something > does put amanda-common in *.substvars in shlibs:Depends, something > else in dpkg merges that dependency with what you already specify in > d/control and keeps the one more restrictive (the versioned one you > specify in d/control) => 4 lines less. Done > * on a site note, do you know that the nice thing of using variables > with only one letter in a makefile makes possible to just use $c > instead of $(c) ? :) I don't like that and I don't like this 3 variable names, so they will go away on next upstream release. > > more: > > * d/copyright looks outdated, at least with regards to years. Also, I'd > love to see a DEP-5 compliant copyright file I don't know how to identify what license is used on Amanda. I don't know what license was used to create the debian package. Should I contact the previous DD that worked on this? > * may you rename d/docs to d/amanda-common.docs, just for clearity? Done > * please add DEP-3 compliant headers to the patches lacking it, it's > otherwise uneededly difficult to understand what a patch is for (and > also just "Description: fix blalba." is annoying, really some > description ought to be loger with a sequel "by changing foo to bar so > that blabla can do incredible stuff and so build again", but this is > not required for my sponsorship offer, just a nice to have in a > future, maybe; also I guess the newer upstream will for sure drop some > patches, so this may become moot soon! ;)) > >> Tomorrow I will look into "lintian -I --pedantic" > yes please :) > > > With the fix of some lintian tags, I think this is about all I'd like > before sponsoring this. Kind regards Jose M Calhariz
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature