Re: Different package sizes on amd64 and (cross)i386

[Goswin von Brederlow]

Nicolas Joseph  writes:

> Maybe but debarchiver reject my upload because the file is already added and 
> has
> a different md5 sum.
>
> how do you do for real repositories?
>
> 2010/5/16 Goswin von Brederlow :
>> Nicolas Joseph  writes:
>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I try to build a package for i386 and amd64. I cross-build the i386 package 
>>> with
>>> the recommendation of the FAQ: 
>>> http://wiki.debian.org/DebianAMD64Faq#line-95 but
>>> independent architecture packages (common.dev, dev.dev and debian.tar.gz) 
>>> are
>>> a different size.
>>>
>>> The content is the same, it's propably the compression, better on i386.
>>>
>>> Here the content of the .change file:
>>>
>>>  * for amd64
>>> Files:
>>>  a48bee53376b85ccc39a1d9b83d6d2d3 913 devel optional valide_0.7.0-1.dsc
>>>  13c01d12262341f3a5e5bf671e5bb33a 1496411 devel optional
>>> valide_0.7.0.orig.tar.gz
>>>  5549ed7846ab9b8deb885d4b3d21cae7 5055 devel optional
>>> valide_0.7.0-1.debian.tar.gz
>>>  d2e0fc0686f167cec0143611d81be0d4 641460 devel optional 
>>> valide_0.7.0-1_amd64.deb
>>>  146b7a571e4c9d1c428c8a62354670c9 253824 devel optional
>>> valide-common_0.7.0-1_all.deb
>>>  2844a0b72a69306bb8cf8225401dae42 49228 devel optional
>>> valide-dev_0.7.0-1_all.deb
>>>  866cd83f20fced4ea4a796fab6ec2ab1 6544620 debug extra
>>> valide-dbg_0.7.0-1_amd64.deb
>>>
>>>  * for i386
>>> Files:
>>>  e7f66dce3107b0c337d1837607133820 913 devel optional valide_0.7.0-1.dsc
>>>  13c01d12262341f3a5e5bf671e5bb33a 1496411 devel optional
>>> valide_0.7.0.orig.tar.gz
>>>  37861bf8bb9d52e089f7fe68614cb1e6 5054 devel optional
>>> valide_0.7.0-1.debian.tar.gz
>>>  86c0106ebb461a328cf2bd3dde72b3f9 551350 devel optional 
>>> valide_0.7.0-1_i386.deb
>>>  0a1c4d48123986d472e60e61c6d12818 253840 devel optional
>>> valide-common_0.7.0-1_all.deb
>>>  8a883165f0fe37e03258c9ff46f8dda1 49234 devel optional
>>> valide-dev_0.7.0-1_all.deb
>>>  832ae60a005d5276c5aa0ab21da861ba 6547974 debug extra
>>> valide-dbg_0.7.0-1_i386.deb
>>>
>>>
>>> Have you an idea?
>>>
>>> Thank's in advance.
>>
>> You are talking about a few bytes. You probably just got lucky on i386
>> and got timestamps that compress better.
>>
>> MfG
>>        Goswin

Build the package with -s, -sa or -b on amd64 and with -B on i386. That
way the i386 build will only add the i386 specific packages and not
source or architecture independent packages.

MfG
Goswin


-- 
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/87tyq788ay@frosties.localdomain

Re: GPL-1 versus GPL-2

[Russ Allbery]

Mats Erik Andersson  writes:

> in the course of renovating an older package, prior to
> adopting it, I ran into a calamity. On the one hand the
> source files are individually lisensed as GPL-1+, while
> on the other hand 'debian/copyright' is claiming GPL-2+,
> and Lintian is complaining about the symlink-license GPL.

> Which is the proper way of reflecting the author's choice
> of GLP-1+ as his preferred condition. A Lintian override?

There is no way to correctly reflect a license of GPL-1 or GPL-1+ in
Debian currently without including a copy of the GPL v1 in the
debian/copyright file (and overriding the resulting Lintian warnings),
because /usr/share/doc/common-licenses doesn't include the GPL v1.

See http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=436105 for more
details.

In practice, what people normally do for such packages is to point to the
symlink license, document the author's intention in debian/copyright, and
then not worry about it (effectively distributing the package under the
GPL v3 for Debian's purposes since that's the license that one points to
at present if one uses the symlink).  That's not ideal, but it's probably
slightly better than including a copy of the GPL v1 in each package.

My inclination is to resolve Bug#436105 by adding the GPL v1 to
common-licenses.

-- 
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org)   


-- 
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/87tyq7ebu0@windlord.stanford.edu

GPL-1 versus GPL-2

[Mats Erik Andersson]

Dear mentors,

in the course of renovating an older package, prior to
adopting it, I ran into a calamity. On the one hand the
source files are individually lisensed as GPL-1+, while
on the other hand 'debian/copyright' is claiming GPL-2+,
and Lintian is complaining about the symlink-license GPL.

Which is the proper way of reflecting the author's choice
of GLP-1+ as his preferred condition. A Lintian override?

Regards,

Mats Erik Andersson, fil. dr

2459 41E9 C420 3F6D F68B  2E88 F768 4541 F25B 5D41

Subscriber to: debian-mentors, debian-devel-games, debian-perl,
   debian-ipv6, debian-qa


-- 
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/20100516215952.ga32...@mea.homelinux.org

Re: Different package sizes on amd64 and (cross)i386

[Nicolas Joseph]

This is not me, I use dput.

Should I delete manually packages in the .change file?

2010/5/16 Matthew Palmer :
> On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 04:12:20PM +0200, Nicolas Joseph wrote:
>> Maybe but debarchiver reject my upload because the file is already added and 
>> has
>> a different md5 sum.
>>
>> how do you do for real repositories?
>
> You don't upload the same package version twice.  If you need to update,
> bump the version number.
>
> We also don't top post.
>
> - Matt
>
>
> --
> 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/20100516195827.gp30...@hezmatt.org
>
>



-- 
Nicolas Joseph


--
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/aanlktinzkqfh1p3nqtbrml8hw2neq-kq87tww76_u...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Different package sizes on amd64 and (cross)i386

[Matthew Palmer]

On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 04:12:20PM +0200, Nicolas Joseph wrote:
> Maybe but debarchiver reject my upload because the file is already added and 
> has
> a different md5 sum.
> 
> how do you do for real repositories?

You don't upload the same package version twice.  If you need to update,
bump the version number.

We also don't top post.

- Matt


-- 
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/20100516195827.gp30...@hezmatt.org

Re: Possible trimming of build dependencies

[George Danchev]

Tony Houghton writes:
> On Sun, 16 May 2010 20:51:45 +0300
> 
> George Danchev  wrote:
> > Tony Houghton writes:
> > > On Sun, 16 May 2010 19:38:59 +0300
> > > 
> > > George Danchev  wrote:
> > > > Also, it seems to me that build-depending on xsltproc && docbook-xsl
> > > > && docbook-xml would not extremely trim the bits to be pulled as
> > > > compared to those pulled in the xmlto case, so don't expect big wins
> > > > here ;-)
> > > 
> > > AFAICT the above trio don't depend on the (la)tex packages that xmlto
> > > does, and they take a long time to install.
> > 
> > Well, xmlto does not pull any latex packages AFAICS, and my cowbuilder
> > --login test says dice wrt build-dependencies drag:
> > 
> > # apt-get install xmlto
> > Need to get 468kB/3592kB of archives.
> > After this operation, 20.6MB of additional disk space will be used.
> > Do you want to continue [Y/n]? n
> > 
> > # apt-get install xsltproc docbook-xsl docbook-xml
> > Need to get 345kB/3469kB of archives.
> > After this operation, 20.1MB of additional disk space will be used.
> > Do you want to continue [Y/n]? n
> 
> Looks like you're right. 

Yeah, I was, but Jakub changed the rules: xsltproc --novalid and no docbook-
xml is to be dragged. See, the rest of mails in that thread.

> I uninstalled a load of tex packages and tried
> apt-get build-dep roxterm again and it didn't want to install anything
> beyond xmlto. But I'm sure when I ran apt-get build-dep roxterm recently
> it downloaded lots of tex packages, and there are no other likely
> looking candidates. Perhaps those dependencies have been removed from
> xmlto (or moved to Suggests: by the look of it). And it might have been
> on one of the Ubuntu machines I sometimes use.

Ahem, I see, mistakes happen, thus clean chroots (and note to myself: clean 
apt caches;-) are to be used for such tweaking. In fact, other packages' 
{Build-}dependencies change over time, it is pretty common since new versions 
are uploaded, improvements are introduced, etc, so we always check when we 
need to. To be honest, xmlto's own dependencies (in Debian unstable) look sane 
to me, so you might be witnessed some transient inefficiency which has been 
subsequently corrected lately.

-- 
pub 4096R/0E4BD0AB 


-- 
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/201005162143.24292.danc...@spnet.net

Re: Possible trimming of build dependencies

[George Danchev]

Jakub Wilk writes:
> * George Danchev , 2010-05-16, 20:51:
> >>> Also, it seems to me that build-depending on xsltproc && docbook-xsl
> >>> && docbook-xml would not extremely trim the bits to be pulled as
> >>> compared to those pulled in the xmlto case, so don't expect big wins
> >>> here ;-)
> >> 
> >> AFAICT the above trio don't depend on the (la)tex packages that xmlto
> >> does, and they take a long time to install.
> >
> >Well, xmlto does not pull any latex packages AFAICS, and my cowbuilder
> >--login test says dice wrt build-dependencies drag:
> >
> ># apt-get install xmlto
> >Need to get 468kB/3592kB of archives.
> >After this operation, 20.6MB of additional disk space will be used.
> >Do you want to continue [Y/n]? n
> >
> ># apt-get install xsltproc docbook-xsl docbook-xml
> >Need to get 345kB/3469kB of archives.
> >After this operation, 20.1MB of additional disk space will be used.
> >Do you want to continue [Y/n]? n
> 
> You don't need docbook-xml if you use --nonet or --novalid:
> 
> # apt-get install xsltproc docbook-xsl
> [...]
> Need to get 0B/2840kB of archives.
> After this operation, 15.8MB of additional disk space will be used.

With --nonet alone and without docbook-xml installed I get a minor nuisance, 
which might be innocent, since the man-page looks correctly generated to me.

xsltproc -''-nonet -''-param man.charmap.use.subset "0" 
/usr/share/sgml/docbook/stylesheet/xsl/nwalsh/manpages/docbook.xsl 
man/XXX.1.xml
I/O error : Attempt to load network entity http://www.oasis-
open.org/docbook/xml/4.5/docbookx.dtd
man/XXX.1.xml:62: warning: failed to load external entity "http://www.oasis-
open.org/docbook/xml/4.5/docbookx.dtd"
]>
  ^

OTOH, --novalid (if applicable in that case, of course, well we can always 
have several invocations of xsltproc with different option sets) really 
prevents loading dtd, and not having to pull docbook-xml looks like a decent 
cut, indeed, I agree.

-- 
pub 4096R/0E4BD0AB 


-- 
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/201005162131.11002.danc...@spnet.net

Re: Possible trimming of build dependencies

[Tony Houghton]

On Sun, 16 May 2010 20:51:45 +0300
George Danchev  wrote:

> Tony Houghton writes:
> > On Sun, 16 May 2010 19:38:59 +0300
> > 
> > George Danchev  wrote:
> > > Also, it seems to me that build-depending on xsltproc && docbook-xsl &&
> > > docbook-xml would not extremely trim the bits to be pulled as compared to
> > > those pulled in the xmlto case, so don't expect big wins here ;-)
> > 
> > AFAICT the above trio don't depend on the (la)tex packages that xmlto
> > does, and they take a long time to install.
> 
> Well, xmlto does not pull any latex packages AFAICS, and my cowbuilder 
> --login 
> test says dice wrt build-dependencies drag:
> 
> # apt-get install xmlto
> Need to get 468kB/3592kB of archives.
> After this operation, 20.6MB of additional disk space will be used.
> Do you want to continue [Y/n]? n
> 
> # apt-get install xsltproc docbook-xsl docbook-xml
> Need to get 345kB/3469kB of archives.
> After this operation, 20.1MB of additional disk space will be used.
> Do you want to continue [Y/n]? n

Looks like you're right. I uninstalled a load of tex packages and tried
apt-get build-dep roxterm again and it didn't want to install anything
beyond xmlto. But I'm sure when I ran apt-get build-dep roxterm recently
it downloaded lots of tex packages, and there are no other likely
looking candidates. Perhaps those dependencies have been removed from
xmlto (or moved to Suggests: by the look of it). And it might have been
on one of the Ubuntu machines I sometimes use.

-- 
TH * http://www.realh.co.uk


-- 
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/20100516191944.79960...@realh.co.uk

Re: Possible trimming of build dependencies

[Jakub Wilk]

* George Danchev , 2010-05-16, 20:51:
Also, it seems to me that build-depending on xsltproc && docbook-xsl 
&& docbook-xml would not extremely trim the bits to be pulled as 
compared to those pulled in the xmlto case, so don't expect big wins 
here ;-)


AFAICT the above trio don't depend on the (la)tex packages that xmlto 
does, and they take a long time to install.


Well, xmlto does not pull any latex packages AFAICS, and my cowbuilder --login
test says dice wrt build-dependencies drag:

# apt-get install xmlto
Need to get 468kB/3592kB of archives.
After this operation, 20.6MB of additional disk space will be used.
Do you want to continue [Y/n]? n

# apt-get install xsltproc docbook-xsl docbook-xml
Need to get 345kB/3469kB of archives.
After this operation, 20.1MB of additional disk space will be used.
Do you want to continue [Y/n]? n


You don't need docbook-xml if you use --nonet or --novalid:

# apt-get install xsltproc docbook-xsl
[...]

Need to get 0B/2840kB of archives.
After this operation, 15.8MB of additional disk space will be used.

--
Jakub Wilk


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Possible trimming of build dependencies

[George Danchev]

George Danchev writes:
> Tony Houghton writes:
> > On Sun, 16 May 2010 19:38:59 +0300
> > 
> > George Danchev  wrote:
> > > Also, it seems to me that build-depending on xsltproc && docbook-xsl &&
> > > docbook-xml would not extremely trim the bits to be pulled as compared
> > > to those pulled in the xmlto case, so don't expect big wins here ;-)
> > 
> > AFAICT the above trio don't depend on the (la)tex packages that xmlto
> > does, and they take a long time to install.
> 
> Well, xmlto does not pull any latex packages AFAICS, and my cowbuilder
> --login test says dice wrt build-dependencies drag:
> 
> # apt-get install xmlto
> Need to get 468kB/3592kB of archives.
> After this operation, 20.6MB of additional disk space will be used.
> Do you want to continue [Y/n]? n
> 
> # apt-get install xsltproc docbook-xsl docbook-xml
> Need to get 345kB/3469kB of archives.
> After this operation, 20.1MB of additional disk space will be used.
> Do you want to continue [Y/n]? n
> 
> Both approaches would do, imho.

A slight correction: my main system's apt cache /var/cache/apt/archives/ 
wasn't perfectly clean, however the drag it is still 3592kB (xmlto) vs.3469kB 
(trio).

-- 
pub 4096R/0E4BD0AB 


-- 
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/201005162104.33236.danc...@spnet.net

Re: Possible trimming of build dependencies

[George Danchev]

Tony Houghton writes:
> On Sun, 16 May 2010 19:38:59 +0300
> 
> George Danchev  wrote:
> > Also, it seems to me that build-depending on xsltproc && docbook-xsl &&
> > docbook-xml would not extremely trim the bits to be pulled as compared to
> > those pulled in the xmlto case, so don't expect big wins here ;-)
> 
> AFAICT the above trio don't depend on the (la)tex packages that xmlto
> does, and they take a long time to install.

Well, xmlto does not pull any latex packages AFAICS, and my cowbuilder --login 
test says dice wrt build-dependencies drag:

# apt-get install xmlto
Need to get 468kB/3592kB of archives.
After this operation, 20.6MB of additional disk space will be used.
Do you want to continue [Y/n]? n

# apt-get install xsltproc docbook-xsl docbook-xml
Need to get 345kB/3469kB of archives.
After this operation, 20.1MB of additional disk space will be used.
Do you want to continue [Y/n]? n

Both approaches would do, imho.

-- 
pub 4096R/0E4BD0AB 


-- 
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/201005162051.47592.danc...@spnet.net

Re: Possible trimming of build dependencies

[Tony Houghton]

On Sun, 16 May 2010 19:38:59 +0300
George Danchev  wrote:

> Also, it seems to me that build-depending on xsltproc && docbook-xsl && 
> docbook-xml would not extremely trim the bits to be pulled as compared to 
> those pulled in the xmlto case, so don't expect big wins here ;-)

AFAICT the above trio don't depend on the (la)tex packages that xmlto
does, and they take a long time to install.

-- 
TH * http://www.realh.co.uk


-- 
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/20100516182148.344dd...@realh.co.uk

Re: Possible trimming of build dependencies

[George Danchev]

Jakub Wilk writes:

Hi,

> * Tony Houghton , 2010-05-16, 16:06:
> >>override_dh_auto_build:
> >>xsltproc --nonet \
> >>
> >> --param make.year.ranges 1 \
> >> --param make.single.year.ranges 1 \
> >> --param man.charmap.use.subset 0 \
> >> -o debian/ \
> >>  
> >>  http://docbook.sourceforge.net/release/xsl/current/manpages
> >>  /docbook.xsl \
> >>  
> >>debian/gentoo.1.xml
> >>dh_auto_build
> >
> >What do those --param options do?
> 
> make.year.ranges and make.single.year.ranges affect how consequent
>  elements are rendered; when you turn them on, you'll get:
> "Copyright © 2039-2042 J. Random Hacker"
> istead of
> "Copyright © 2039, 2040, 2041, 2042 J. Random Hacker"
> 
> DocBook XSLs can convert ca. 800 Unicode character into roff sequences.
> However, for efficiency reasons, only a small subset of these character
> is used by default. AFAIR this subset doesn't include e.g. the copyright
> sign, so man.charmap.use.subset=0 is needed to make the conversion sane.

Tony, 

JFTR: for complete parameters reference, see one of docbook-xsl-doc packages, 
say the -html: 
file:/usr/share/doc/docbook-xsl-doc-
html/doc/manpages/man.charmap.use.subset.html

As a reference, cppcheck package does:
xsltproc -''-nonet -''-param man.charmap.use.subset "0" \
/usr/share/sgml/docbook/stylesheet/xsl/nwalsh/manpages/docbook.xsl
man/cppcheck.1.xml

(which reminds me that /share/xml/docbook/stylesheet/nwalsh/ should be changed 
to /usr/share/xml/docbook/stylesheet/docbook-xsl/)

Also, it seems to me that build-depending on xsltproc && docbook-xsl && 
docbook-xml would not extremely trim the bits to be pulled as compared to 
those pulled in the xmlto case, so don't expect big wins here ;-)

-- 
pub 4096R/0E4BD0AB 


--
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/201005161939.01103.danc...@spnet.net

Re: Possible trimming of build dependencies

[Jakub Wilk]

* Tony Houghton , 2010-05-16, 16:06:

   override_dh_auto_build:
   xsltproc --nonet \
--param make.year.ranges 1 \
--param make.single.year.ranges 1 \
--param man.charmap.use.subset 0 \
-o debian/ \
 
http://docbook.sourceforge.net/release/xsl/current/manpages/docbook.xsl \
   debian/gentoo.1.xml
   dh_auto_build


What do those --param options do?


make.year.ranges and make.single.year.ranges affect how consequent 
 elements are rendered; when you turn them on, you'll get:

"Copyright © 2039-2042 J. Random Hacker"
istead of 
"Copyright © 2039, 2040, 2041, 2042 J. Random Hacker"


DocBook XSLs can convert ca. 800 Unicode character into roff sequences.  
However, for efficiency reasons, only a small subset of these character 
is used by default. AFAIR this subset doesn't include e.g. the copyright 
sign, so man.charmap.use.subset=0 is needed to make the conversion sane.


--
Jakub Wilk


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Possible trimming of build dependencies

[Tony Houghton]

On Sun, 16 May 2010 21:44:42 +0900
Osamu Aoki  wrote:

>override_dh_auto_build:
>xsltproc --nonet \
> --param make.year.ranges 1 \
> --param make.single.year.ranges 1 \
> --param man.charmap.use.subset 0 \
> -o debian/ \
>  
> http://docbook.sourceforge.net/release/xsl/current/manpages/docbook.xsl \
>debian/gentoo.1.xml
>dh_auto_build

What do those --param options do?

-- 
TH * http://www.realh.co.uk


-- 
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/20100516160619.53f15...@realh.co.uk

Re: Different package sizes on amd64 and (cross)i386

[Nicolas Joseph]

Maybe but debarchiver reject my upload because the file is already added and has
a different md5 sum.

how do you do for real repositories?

2010/5/16 Goswin von Brederlow :
> Nicolas Joseph  writes:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I try to build a package for i386 and amd64. I cross-build the i386 package 
>> with
>> the recommendation of the FAQ: http://wiki.debian.org/DebianAMD64Faq#line-95 
>> but
>> independent architecture packages (common.dev, dev.dev and debian.tar.gz) are
>> a different size.
>>
>> The content is the same, it's propably the compression, better on i386.
>>
>> Here the content of the .change file:
>>
>>  * for amd64
>> Files:
>>  a48bee53376b85ccc39a1d9b83d6d2d3 913 devel optional valide_0.7.0-1.dsc
>>  13c01d12262341f3a5e5bf671e5bb33a 1496411 devel optional
>> valide_0.7.0.orig.tar.gz
>>  5549ed7846ab9b8deb885d4b3d21cae7 5055 devel optional
>> valide_0.7.0-1.debian.tar.gz
>>  d2e0fc0686f167cec0143611d81be0d4 641460 devel optional 
>> valide_0.7.0-1_amd64.deb
>>  146b7a571e4c9d1c428c8a62354670c9 253824 devel optional
>> valide-common_0.7.0-1_all.deb
>>  2844a0b72a69306bb8cf8225401dae42 49228 devel optional
>> valide-dev_0.7.0-1_all.deb
>>  866cd83f20fced4ea4a796fab6ec2ab1 6544620 debug extra
>> valide-dbg_0.7.0-1_amd64.deb
>>
>>  * for i386
>> Files:
>>  e7f66dce3107b0c337d1837607133820 913 devel optional valide_0.7.0-1.dsc
>>  13c01d12262341f3a5e5bf671e5bb33a 1496411 devel optional
>> valide_0.7.0.orig.tar.gz
>>  37861bf8bb9d52e089f7fe68614cb1e6 5054 devel optional
>> valide_0.7.0-1.debian.tar.gz
>>  86c0106ebb461a328cf2bd3dde72b3f9 551350 devel optional 
>> valide_0.7.0-1_i386.deb
>>  0a1c4d48123986d472e60e61c6d12818 253840 devel optional
>> valide-common_0.7.0-1_all.deb
>>  8a883165f0fe37e03258c9ff46f8dda1 49234 devel optional
>> valide-dev_0.7.0-1_all.deb
>>  832ae60a005d5276c5aa0ab21da861ba 6547974 debug extra
>> valide-dbg_0.7.0-1_i386.deb
>>
>>
>> Have you an idea?
>>
>> Thank's in advance.
>
> You are talking about a few bytes. You probably just got lucky on i386
> and got timestamps that compress better.
>
> MfG
>        Goswin
>



-- 
Nicolas Joseph


--
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/aanlktilfiswluk50hylk4sfvklpjxbnk6zzmeyla6...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Different package sizes on amd64 and (cross)i386

[Goswin von Brederlow]

Nicolas Joseph  writes:

> Hello,
>
> I try to build a package for i386 and amd64. I cross-build the i386 package 
> with
> the recommendation of the FAQ: http://wiki.debian.org/DebianAMD64Faq#line-95 
> but
> independent architecture packages (common.dev, dev.dev and debian.tar.gz) are
> a different size.
>
> The content is the same, it's propably the compression, better on i386.
>
> Here the content of the .change file:
>
>  * for amd64
> Files:
>  a48bee53376b85ccc39a1d9b83d6d2d3 913 devel optional valide_0.7.0-1.dsc
>  13c01d12262341f3a5e5bf671e5bb33a 1496411 devel optional
> valide_0.7.0.orig.tar.gz
>  5549ed7846ab9b8deb885d4b3d21cae7 5055 devel optional
> valide_0.7.0-1.debian.tar.gz
>  d2e0fc0686f167cec0143611d81be0d4 641460 devel optional 
> valide_0.7.0-1_amd64.deb
>  146b7a571e4c9d1c428c8a62354670c9 253824 devel optional
> valide-common_0.7.0-1_all.deb
>  2844a0b72a69306bb8cf8225401dae42 49228 devel optional
> valide-dev_0.7.0-1_all.deb
>  866cd83f20fced4ea4a796fab6ec2ab1 6544620 debug extra
> valide-dbg_0.7.0-1_amd64.deb
>
>  * for i386
> Files:
>  e7f66dce3107b0c337d1837607133820 913 devel optional valide_0.7.0-1.dsc
>  13c01d12262341f3a5e5bf671e5bb33a 1496411 devel optional
> valide_0.7.0.orig.tar.gz
>  37861bf8bb9d52e089f7fe68614cb1e6 5054 devel optional
> valide_0.7.0-1.debian.tar.gz
>  86c0106ebb461a328cf2bd3dde72b3f9 551350 devel optional 
> valide_0.7.0-1_i386.deb
>  0a1c4d48123986d472e60e61c6d12818 253840 devel optional
> valide-common_0.7.0-1_all.deb
>  8a883165f0fe37e03258c9ff46f8dda1 49234 devel optional
> valide-dev_0.7.0-1_all.deb
>  832ae60a005d5276c5aa0ab21da861ba 6547974 debug extra
> valide-dbg_0.7.0-1_i386.deb
>
>
> Have you an idea?
>
> Thank's in advance.

You are talking about a few bytes. You probably just got lucky on i386
and got timestamps that compress better.

MfG
Goswin


-- 
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/87y6fkq74e@frosties.localdomain

Re: Packaging Help

[Osamu Aoki]

On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 03:16:13PM +0200, James Stuckey wrote:
> > So I'm not able to have debian-multimedia in my sources when I use
> > pbuilder?

You can have it. 

> I commented out the dmm line from my sources, and then deleted it, and I'm
> still getting the same error from pbuilder.

Have you checked /etc/pbuilderrc contents created when pbuilder was
installed by you answering debconf question.

Osamu


-- 
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/20100516133634.ga19...@osamu.debian.net

Re: RFS: morse (updated package)

[Serafeim Zanikolas]

Chris,

In debian/copyright

* please replace:

This work was packaged for Debian by:

Nanakos Chrysostomos  on Thu, 12 May 2010 
20:45:18 +

This package was debianized by Joop Stakenborg  on Tue, 
21
Feb 2006 23:36:14 +0100

with:

This package was debianized by Joop Stakenborg  on Tue, 
21
Feb 2006 23:36:14 +0100, and is currently maintained by Nanakos Chrysostomos
.

* the packaging license should match the upstream license, ie.

The Debian packaging is (C) 2006, Joop Stakenborg  
and is licensed under the GPL, see `/usr/share/common-licenses/GPL'.

should become:

The Debian packaging is © 2006, Joop Stakenborg  
and is licensed under the same terms as the upstream software.

* I already mentioned to replace all occurrences of (C) with ©; lintian
  reports this as copyright-with-old-dh-make-debian-copyright

* finally, the placeholder below should be removed from debian/copyright
  (again, lintian reports this as copyright-contains-dh_make-todo-boilerplate):

# Please also look if there are files or directories which have a
# different copyright/license attached and list them here.

debian/patches/03morse:

* the second hunk in there is redundant; please remove it

Finally, switching to minimal dh rules would be nice, but I understand if
you'd rather leave it for the next upload.

Cheers,
Serafeim

-- 
debtags-organised WNPP bugs: http://members.hellug.gr/serzan/wnpp


-- 
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/20100516135403.ga3...@mobee

Re: Possible trimming of build dependencies

[Jakub Wilk]

* Osamu Aoki , 2010-05-16, 21:44:
Originally I used xsltproc to generate roxterm's man pages, as per 
the example in the New Maintainers' Guide, but when I moved the man 
pages upstream I got a bug report because the location of 
docbook.xsl isn't consistent across OSs


Just use 
http://docbook.sourceforge.net/release/xsl/current/manpages/docbook.xsl 
instead of the file name. Thanks to XML catalogs, xsltproc _won't_ 
download this file if docbook-xsl is installed.


Are you suggesting to change from:

  override_dh_auto_build:
  xsltproc --nonet \
   --param make.year.ranges 1 \
   --param make.single.year.ranges 1 \
   --param man.charmap.use.subset 0 \
   -o debian/ \
/usr/share/xml/docbook/stylesheet/nwalsh/manpages/docbook.xsl \
  debian/gentoo.1.xml
  dh_auto_build

to
  override_dh_auto_build:
  xsltproc --nonet \
   --param make.year.ranges 1 \
   --param make.single.year.ranges 1 \
   --param man.charmap.use.subset 0 \
   -o debian/ \

http://docbook.sourceforge.net/release/xsl/current/manpages/docbook.xsl \
  debian/gentoo.1.xml
  dh_auto_build


Yes, this is what docbook-xsl maintainer recommends:

$ zcat /usr/share/doc/docbook-xsl/NEWS.Debian.gz | grep '1.74.3+dfsg-1' -A 9
docbook-xsl (1.74.3+dfsg-1) unstable; urgency=low

  IMPORTANT: The stylesheets have been moved from
  /usr/share/xml/docbook/stylesheet/nwalsh/ to
  /usr/share/xml/docbook/stylesheet/docbook-xsl/. The old directory is a
  symlink to the new location for compatibility reasons. Note, that I plan to
  drop the old location /usr/share/xml/docbook/stylesheet/nwalsh/ in the
  future. So plese adjust the path in your scripts, XML documents, ... or
  better: use the WWW resource URI and the catalog system.

--
Jakub Wilk


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Possible trimming of build dependencies

[Jakub Wilk]

* Tony Houghton , 2010-05-16, 12:57:
Originally I used xsltproc to generate roxterm's man pages, as per 
the example in the New Maintainers' Guide, but when I moved the man 
pages upstream I got a bug report because the location of docbook.xsl 
isn't consistent across OSs


Just use 
http://docbook.sourceforge.net/release/xsl/current/manpages/docbook.xsl 
instead of the file name. Thanks to XML catalogs, xsltproc _won't_ 
download this file if docbook-xsl is installed.


Thanks, that sounds ideal. Should I still use the -nonet option?


You either need --nonet or --novalid or additional build-dependency on 
docbook-xml; otherwise xsltproc would try to download DTD for DocBook.


I recommend to always use xsltproc with --nonet, even if it is not 
necessary.


--
Jakub Wilk


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

RFS: gurlchecker - New upstream version

[Bilal Akhtar]

Hi mentors!
I have packaged a new upstream version (0.13) of package gurlchecker
which is already in debian sid (version 0.11.2) . The debdiff from the
sid package to the new one can be found here:-

http://expatsinksa.com/gurlchecker_0.13-1.debdiff

I am looking for sponsors for
the package, as the maintainer of the package gave me this reply when I
mailed the debdiff to him:-

On Sun, 2010-05-16 at 05:22 +, Bart Martens wrote: 
> On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 05:45:35PM +0300, Bilal Akhtar wrote:
> > Hello,
> > I have packaged a new upstream version of package "gurlchecker" for
> > debian unstable. I request you to review the attached debdiff and see if
> > it meets your requirements. Your e-mail address was given in the
> > Maintainer field of the package, so I mailed it to you.
> 
> I'm rather busy with other things.  Please request a sponsor via
> debian-mentors.  Or maybe Adam D. Barratt (cc) wants to sponsor your package.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Bart Martens

I would be glad if anyone helps in updating the version of the package
in the archive. I have checked the package for errors using lintian and
ran a test build in pbuilder as well.
Cheers,
Bilal Akhtar.





-- 
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/1274015952.3224.16.ca...@bilal-laptop

Re: Packaging Help

[James Stuckey]

On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 3:13 PM, James Stuckey  wrote:

>
>
> On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 3:34 AM, Paul Wise  wrote:
>
>> On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 5:39 AM, James Stuckey 
>> wrote:
>>
>> > I'm interested in learning more about development/packaging on Debian.
>> I've
>> > downloaded some  source to package, ran dh_make on it, and now I'm
>> trying to
>> > use pbuilder to create a package from it.
>> ...
>> > I: Checking component main on ftp://ftp.debian-multimedia.org...
>> > E: Couldn't find these debs: apt
>> > E: debootstrap failed
>> ...
>>
>> Looks like you chose the wrong ftp site. Try ftp.debian.org instead.
>>
>> --
>> bye,
>> pabs
>>
>> http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
>>
>>
>>
> So I'm not able to have debian-multimedia in my sources when I use
> pbuilder?
>


I commented out the dmm line from my sources, and then deleted it, and I'm
still getting the same error from pbuilder.

Re: Packaging Help

[James Stuckey]

On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 3:34 AM, Paul Wise  wrote:

> On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 5:39 AM, James Stuckey 
> wrote:
>
> > I'm interested in learning more about development/packaging on Debian.
> I've
> > downloaded some  source to package, ran dh_make on it, and now I'm trying
> to
> > use pbuilder to create a package from it.
> ...
> > I: Checking component main on ftp://ftp.debian-multimedia.org...
> > E: Couldn't find these debs: apt
> > E: debootstrap failed
> ...
>
> Looks like you chose the wrong ftp site. Try ftp.debian.org instead.
>
> --
> bye,
> pabs
>
> http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
>
>
>
So I'm not able to have debian-multimedia in my sources when I use pbuilder?

Re: Possible trimming of build dependencies

[Osamu Aoki]

On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 12:57:39PM +0100, Tony Houghton wrote:
> On Fri, 14 May 2010 17:07:11 +0200
> Jakub Wilk  wrote:
> 
> > * Tony Houghton , 2010-05-14, 15:41:
> > >Originally I used xsltproc to generate roxterm's man pages, as per
> > >the example in the New Maintainers' Guide, but when I moved the man
> > >pages upstream I got a bug report because the location of
> > >docbook.xsl isn't consistent across OSs
> > 
> > Just use 
> > http://docbook.sourceforge.net/release/xsl/current/manpages/docbook.xsl 
> > instead of the file name. Thanks to XML catalogs, xsltproc _won't_ 
> > download this file if docbook-xsl is installed.

Are you suggesting to change from:

   override_dh_auto_build:
   xsltproc --nonet \
--param make.year.ranges 1 \
--param make.single.year.ranges 1 \
--param man.charmap.use.subset 0 \
-o debian/ \
 /usr/share/xml/docbook/stylesheet/nwalsh/manpages/docbook.xsl \
   debian/gentoo.1.xml
   dh_auto_build

to 
   override_dh_auto_build:
   xsltproc --nonet \
--param make.year.ranges 1 \
--param make.single.year.ranges 1 \
--param man.charmap.use.subset 0 \
-o debian/ \
 
http://docbook.sourceforge.net/release/xsl/current/manpages/docbook.xsl \
   debian/gentoo.1.xml
   dh_auto_build

???  If this is better, I will change maint-guide.

by the way, this came from dh_make ?

XP = xsltproc -''-nonet -''-param man.charmap.use.subset "0"
DB2MAN = /usr/share/sgml/docbook/stylesheet/xsl/nwalsh/manpages/docbook.xsl
manpage.1: manpage.xml
$(XP) $(DB2MAN) $<

If this is better to use http://docbook. then we should ask dh-make package
to change too.  Then when ever ported or merged into main makefile, we are OK. 

> Thanks, that sounds ideal. Should I still use the -nonet option?

FYI: I think I had some other issues which made me not to include text for 
xmlto.  


-- 
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/20100516124442.ga22...@osamu.debian.net

Different package sizes on amd64 and (cross)i386

[Nicolas Joseph]

Hello,

I try to build a package for i386 and amd64. I cross-build the i386 package with
the recommendation of the FAQ: http://wiki.debian.org/DebianAMD64Faq#line-95 but
independent architecture packages (common.dev, dev.dev and debian.tar.gz) are
a different size.

The content is the same, it's propably the compression, better on i386.

Here the content of the .change file:

 * for amd64
Files:
 a48bee53376b85ccc39a1d9b83d6d2d3 913 devel optional valide_0.7.0-1.dsc
 13c01d12262341f3a5e5bf671e5bb33a 1496411 devel optional
valide_0.7.0.orig.tar.gz
 5549ed7846ab9b8deb885d4b3d21cae7 5055 devel optional
valide_0.7.0-1.debian.tar.gz
 d2e0fc0686f167cec0143611d81be0d4 641460 devel optional valide_0.7.0-1_amd64.deb
 146b7a571e4c9d1c428c8a62354670c9 253824 devel optional
valide-common_0.7.0-1_all.deb
 2844a0b72a69306bb8cf8225401dae42 49228 devel optional
valide-dev_0.7.0-1_all.deb
 866cd83f20fced4ea4a796fab6ec2ab1 6544620 debug extra
valide-dbg_0.7.0-1_amd64.deb

 * for i386
Files:
 e7f66dce3107b0c337d1837607133820 913 devel optional valide_0.7.0-1.dsc
 13c01d12262341f3a5e5bf671e5bb33a 1496411 devel optional
valide_0.7.0.orig.tar.gz
 37861bf8bb9d52e089f7fe68614cb1e6 5054 devel optional
valide_0.7.0-1.debian.tar.gz
 86c0106ebb461a328cf2bd3dde72b3f9 551350 devel optional valide_0.7.0-1_i386.deb
 0a1c4d48123986d472e60e61c6d12818 253840 devel optional
valide-common_0.7.0-1_all.deb
 8a883165f0fe37e03258c9ff46f8dda1 49234 devel optional
valide-dev_0.7.0-1_all.deb
 832ae60a005d5276c5aa0ab21da861ba 6547974 debug extra
valide-dbg_0.7.0-1_i386.deb


Have you an idea?

Thank's in advance.
--
Nicolas Joseph


--
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/aanlktilx27yswqi4-tdoeuoy8n78sqrcszhth9exi...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Possible trimming of build dependencies

[Tony Houghton]

On Fri, 14 May 2010 17:07:11 +0200
Jakub Wilk  wrote:

> * Tony Houghton , 2010-05-14, 15:41:
> >Originally I used xsltproc to generate roxterm's man pages, as per
> >the example in the New Maintainers' Guide, but when I moved the man
> >pages upstream I got a bug report because the location of
> >docbook.xsl isn't consistent across OSs
> 
> Just use 
> http://docbook.sourceforge.net/release/xsl/current/manpages/docbook.xsl 
> instead of the file name. Thanks to XML catalogs, xsltproc _won't_ 
> download this file if docbook-xsl is installed.

Thanks, that sounds ideal. Should I still use the -nonet option?


-- 
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/20100516125739.0d583...@toddler

Different package sizes on amd64 and (cross)i386

[Nicolas Joseph]

Hello,

I try to build a package for i386 and amd64. I cross-build the i386 package with
the recommendation of the FAQ: http://wiki.debian.org/DebianAMD64Faq#line-95 but
independent architecture packages (common.dev, dev.dev and debian.tar.gz) are
a different size.

The content is the same, it's propably the compression, better on i386.

Here the content of the .change file:

 * for amd64
Files:
 a48bee53376b85ccc39a1d9b83d6d2d3 913 devel optional valide_0.7.0-1.dsc
 13c01d12262341f3a5e5bf671e5bb33a 1496411 devel optional
valide_0.7.0.orig.tar.gz
 5549ed7846ab9b8deb885d4b3d21cae7 5055 devel optional
valide_0.7.0-1.debian.tar.gz
 d2e0fc0686f167cec0143611d81be0d4 641460 devel optional valide_0.7.0-1_amd64.deb
 146b7a571e4c9d1c428c8a62354670c9 253824 devel optional
valide-common_0.7.0-1_all.deb
 2844a0b72a69306bb8cf8225401dae42 49228 devel optional
valide-dev_0.7.0-1_all.deb
 866cd83f20fced4ea4a796fab6ec2ab1 6544620 debug extra
valide-dbg_0.7.0-1_amd64.deb

 * for i386
Files:
 e7f66dce3107b0c337d1837607133820 913 devel optional valide_0.7.0-1.dsc
 13c01d12262341f3a5e5bf671e5bb33a 1496411 devel optional
valide_0.7.0.orig.tar.gz
 37861bf8bb9d52e089f7fe68614cb1e6 5054 devel optional
valide_0.7.0-1.debian.tar.gz
 86c0106ebb461a328cf2bd3dde72b3f9 551350 devel optional valide_0.7.0-1_i386.deb
 0a1c4d48123986d472e60e61c6d12818 253840 devel optional
valide-common_0.7.0-1_all.deb
 8a883165f0fe37e03258c9ff46f8dda1 49234 devel optional
valide-dev_0.7.0-1_all.deb
 832ae60a005d5276c5aa0ab21da861ba 6547974 debug extra
valide-dbg_0.7.0-1_i386.deb


Have you an idea?

Thank's in advance.
--
Nicolas Joseph


--
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/aanlktil91ewgtobe72tu3yewsixd7sak1lnuebare...@mail.gmail.com