Hi! On 11/11/2018 at 22:36, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > [wnpp bug added to Cc, so people know what's going on; don't feel like > you need to keep that there, though]
No problem, you did well! > On Sun, Nov 11, 2018 at 04:02:53PM +0100, Jérôme Lebleu wrote: >> Hi Wouter, >> >> I have seen that you have owned the bug #694077 and moved it as ITP. >> >> I have started to work on qlcplus Debian package some months ago, but >> I'm not a Debian Developer (yet, I hope) and lintian is still reporting >> some issues. > > Oh, that's cool! You should've taken the ITP then, however :-) It was in my to-do list, but I was not really at ease to do that and not sure about how to that too... Hopefully, thanks to you it's moving on! >> I have asked the help of a friend which is a DD, but he is >> quite busy > > Yeah, I know the feeling ;-) > >> and didn't have the time yet for a review of what I've done >> with some advice. >> >> So, the time goes on, and I didn't take the time to >> ask for help nor reply on the RFP (ITP now) bug to tell that. If you are >> interested in, here is what I've done until now (any feedback are >> welcome!) : >> >> https://salsa.debian.org/jlebleu-guest/qlcplus >> >> What's your plan regarding qlcplus package? Did you already start the >> work? Anyway, I would gladly help you - and continue to learn Debian >> packaging by the way - if you want and need. > > No, I haven't started yet. I took qlcplus because it seems like a > natural extension to the OpenLighting package which I already maintain; > but given what I already do for Debian and outside, it might be a bit of > a strain anyway, and so if you're interested in maintaining it, then by > all means go ahead! I'll even sponsor your uploads if you need me to. I don't pretend to have a lot of time too, but I would like to contribute to Debian a bit more and as I'm using QLC+, I can take the time to maintain it. Moreover, it's just more encouraging if you can review my work and sponsor it, thanks! > As for what you've got already: I haven't looked at it in great detail > yet (I'll try to do so ASAP), but at first glance here are some > comments: I have attached lintian output of the last build I have done (commit 63597339), if it can help regarding the time you have. > - Your 'qlcplus' package contains files in /usr/lib. These should > probably be split off into a library package -- which is a whole can > of worms to deal with, of which I can imagine you might have some > questions. If so, do ask. You are right, I have some questions regarding that! I am wondering how to package it properly, since lintian is also complaining about some of those files: - package-name-doesnt-match-sonames libqlcplusengine1 libqlcplusui1 libqlcpluswebaccess1 - no-symbols-control-file usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libqlcplusengine.so.1.0.0 - no-symbols-control-file usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libqlcpluswebaccess.so.1.0.0 - no-symbols-control-file usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libqlcplusui.so.1.0.0 - hardening-no-fortify-functions usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/qt5/plugins/qlcplus/libmidiplugin.so ... but also: - non-dev-pkg-with-shlib-symlink usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libqlcplusengine.so.1.0.0 usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libqlcplusengine.so - non-dev-pkg-with-shlib-symlink usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libqlcpluswebaccess.so.1.0.0 usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libqlcpluswebaccess.so - non-dev-pkg-with-shlib-symlink usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libqlcplusui.so.1.0.0 usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libqlcplusui.so Should I indeed split off into a library package? Is it not disproportionate for this software? Regarding the last errors, I believe that a -dev package is non-sense for QLC+, and that those files should probably not be there, isn't it? I have tried to have a look to other Qt-base packages, but didn't succeed to find a solution. Any help and explanations - as I admit that I am really not a C/C++ compilation expert - are welcome! > - I noticed you're disabling the tests because they require a running X > server. We do want to run those during the build; build-depending on a > headless X server such as xvfb should allow you to do so. Thanks, I will try that. I have also disabled them the time to fix the other packaging issues at first. > I'll probably have some more comments for you sometime next week; I'll > get back to you on that then. I will be happy to read them! Best regards, Jérôme
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
