Re: RFS: creepy
On Mon, 9 May 2011 22:14:39 -0500 Daniel Echeverry wrote: > Hi! > > 2011/5/8 Karl Goetz > > > On Sun, 8 May 2011 21:46:20 -0500 > > Daniel Echeverry wrote: > > > > > Dear mentors, > > > > > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "creepy". > > > > > > * Package name: creepy > > > Version : 0.1.9.2-1 > > > Upstream Author : Yiannis Kakavas > > > * URL : http://ilektrojohn.github.com/creepy > > > * License : GPL3 > > > Section : python > > > > > > It builds these binary packages: > > > creepy - geolocation information aggregator > > > > > > The package appears to be lintian clean. > > > > * is the versioning 0.1.92 or 0.1.9.2? > > * related to this, upstream has a 0.1.93 deb in his ppa. this might > > ca > > * policy version is now 3.9.2, you should probably update d/control > > * man page title should be caps > > * possible typo in man page, navigateable -> navigable > > * typo in man page hiting -> hitting > > * please upstream man page (etc), if its not been done yet. > > * not sure 'run a creep gui' is the best way to describe the menu > > entry :) > > > > Done! Thanks! i have a few more comments, if you're not sick of me yet. > Please checkout: > http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/creepy/creepy_0.1.93-1.dsc * looking at the package again I note you put (C) 2011 for upstreams source, but it only has (c) 2010 headers in it. you and upstream should probably both fix that :) * man page still has .TH creepy, aiui this should be .TH CREEPY. Can someone else comment on that? * the .desktop says version 1.9.2, the package is now 1.93 so it needs updating. * I got this error running uscan: 16:50:01 kgoetz@epicfail: /tmp/creepy-0.1.93 $ uscan dpkg: version '/v0.1.9' has bad syntax: invalid character in version number dpkg: version '/v0.1.9' has bad syntax: invalid character in version number creepy: Newer version (/v0.1.9) available on remote site: http://githubredir.debian.net/github/ilektrojohn/creepy/v0.1.9.tar.gz (local version is 0.1.93) creepy: Successfully downloaded updated package v0.1.9.tar.gz and symlinked creepy_/v0.1.9.orig.tar.gz to it thanks, kk -- Karl Goetz, (Kamping_Kaiser / VK5FOSS) Debian contributor / gNewSense Maintainer http://www.kgoetz.id.au No, I won't join your social networking group signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: creepy
Hi! 2011/5/8 Karl Goetz > On Sun, 8 May 2011 21:46:20 -0500 > Daniel Echeverry wrote: > > > Dear mentors, > > > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "creepy". > > > > * Package name: creepy > > Version : 0.1.9.2-1 > > Upstream Author : Yiannis Kakavas > > * URL : http://ilektrojohn.github.com/creepy > > * License : GPL3 > > Section : python > > > > It builds these binary packages: > > creepy - geolocation information aggregator > > > > The package appears to be lintian clean. > > * is the versioning 0.1.92 or 0.1.9.2? > * related to this, upstream has a 0.1.93 deb in his ppa. this might ca > * policy version is now 3.9.2, you should probably update d/control > * man page title should be caps > * possible typo in man page, navigateable -> navigable > * typo in man page hiting -> hitting > * please upstream man page (etc), if its not been done yet. > * not sure 'run a creep gui' is the best way to describe the menu > entry :) > Done! Please checkout: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/creepy/creepy_0.1.93-1.dsc > I'm not a DD, so i can't sponsor but thought i'd give some feedback as > i'm interested in the package too. > > thanks, > kk > > thank you very much! -- Epsilon http://www.rinconinformatico.net http://www.fitnessdeportes.com http://www.dragonjar.org Linux user: #477840 Debian user
Re: Remotely downloaded javascripts in documentation
On Mon, 09 May 2011, Pietro Battiston wrote: > Maybe my question looks a bit rhetoric, but I just want to be sure I > don't patch more than it's strictly required: do I have, in the end, > to remove all the references to remote .js? I don't believe it's currently a requirement, but it's certainly something that should be done. A major point of documentation which is installed with a package is to be readable offline. [After all, if you wanted to read the documentation online, you could just point the user at the upstream webpage.] Don Armstrong -- "What, now?" "Soon equates to good, later to worse, Uagen Zlepe, scholar. Therefore, immediacy." -- Iain M. Banks _Look to Windward_ p 213 http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- 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/2011051352.gb30...@rzlab.ucr.edu
RFS: mcs (updated package)
Hello, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "mcs". * Package name: mcs Version : 0.7.2-1 Upstream Author : William Pitcock * URL : http://www.atheme.org/projects/mcs * License : BSD Section : libs It builds these binary packages: libmcs-backend-gconf - GNOME GConf backend for libmcs libmcs-dev - development library and headers for libmcs1 libmcs-doc - documentation files for libmcs1 libmcs-utils - tools for the maintenance of the mcs system libmcs1- abstraction library to store configuration settings The upload would fix these bugs: 521010. I'd like to maintain this package as the current maintainer isn't doing any maintainance since 2008. The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/mcs - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/mcs/mcs_0.7.2-1.dsc Also, it's kept under version control here: http://hg.debian.org/hg/collab-maint/mcs I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. -- WBR, Andrew signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Library Question
Am Montag, 9. Mai 2011 schrieb Paul Wise: > On Sun, May 8, 2011 at 5:42 PM, Rainer Dorsch wrote: > > No, navit is a third party application, which I want to package on maemo. > > Nokia does not ship any version of Navit (they ship the proprietary OVI > > maps). Freetype belongs to the core system which is shipped by Nokia, > > which I do not want to change, since I fear that it breaks other stuff. > > But applying the patch in question specifically, I might consider it as > > an option... > > > > Yes, I understand, Debian would not introduce such a hack (although e.g. > > libdb comes in a number of versions, libdb4.7, libdb4.8, libdb5.0,...). > > But I am more looking for a tactical short term solution on which I can > > iterate and improve (e.g. why should I replace the Nokia freetype, when > > I do not yet know, that this would fix the problem). > > Yeah, this situation is similar to backporting. > > If you are unable to workaround the freetype bug in navit or use an > older version of navit that works with that version of freetype, then > try this: > > Since the ABI is the same for both versions of freetype, I would > suggest introducing a libfreetype6-navit package that contains the > newer freetype library in a private directory and adding an rpath to > navit pointing at that directory: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rpath_(linking) Can you give a few hints what I need to change in the freetype/debian/rules file to create a libfreetype6-navit package? I would think: -> for the private directory: changing the prefix in ./configure -> for the package name: dh_strip --dbg-package=libfreetype6 to dh_strip -- dbg-package=libfreetype6-navit Anything else? Hmmwhat is the advantage of an rpath compared to a wrapper script with an LD_LIBRARY_PATH? > This is better than static linking since you can upgrade > libfreetype6-navit separately to navit. > > > Cool, I was not aware of this effort. If GPS and modem support will be > > added, the have a usable base system, I am really impressed of this > > effort :-) > > > > The biggest challenge are probably the missing hardware drivers (which > > prohibit e.g. to update the maemo distribution with new kernels). > > In addition the freesmartphone.org distribution SHR (based on > OpenEmbedded) has a port to the N900 (in the early stages): > > http://shr-project.org/trac/wiki/Devices/NokiaN900 Wow, did not see this one before, but I like pkg-n900 better :-) > There is also an Android port: > > http://www.nitdroid.com/ That one I saw before. I am more interested in a debian based system, than in android right now (given, that it does not work much better than the debian based systems). Many thanks for your comments and links, Rainer -- Rainer Dorsch Lärchenstr. 6 D-72135 Dettenhausen 07157-734133 email: rdor...@web.de jabber: rdor...@jabber.org GPG Fingerprint: 5966 C54C 2B3C 42CC 1F4F 8F59 E3A8 C538 7519 141E Full GPG key: http://pgp.mit.edu/ #!/usr/bin/make -f export DH_COMPAT=4 SHELL = /bin/bash CFLAGS = -Wall -g ifneq (,$(findstring noopt,$(DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS))) CFLAGS += -O0 else CFLAGS += -O2 endif ifeq (,$(findstring nostrip,$(DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS))) INSTALL_PROGRAM += -s endif # Use soft-float and thumb mode if it enabled. ifneq (,$(findstring thumb,$(DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS))) CFLAGS += -mthumb endif export CFLAGS configure: configure-stamp configure-stamp: dh_testdir tar -xjf freetype-2.3.9.tar.bz2 patch -p0 < security-CVE-2009-0946.patch patch -p0 < armel-asm-declaration.patch cd freetype-2.3.9 && ./configure --prefix=/usr --sysconfdir=/etc touch configure-stamp build: configure-stamp build-stamp build-stamp: dh_testdir $(MAKE) -C freetype-2.3.9 touch build-stamp clean: dh_testdir dh_testroot rm -f build-stamp configure-stamp rm -rf freetype-2.3.9 rm -fr objs/.libs dh_clean install: build dh_testdir dh_testroot dh_clean -k dh_installdirs $(MAKE) -C freetype-2.3.9 install DESTDIR=$(CURDIR)/debian/tmp binary-indep: build install binary-arch: build install dh_testdir dh_testroot dh_makeshlibs -V dh_installchangelogs dh_install --sourcedir=debian/tmp -v dh_strip --dbg-package=libfreetype6 dh_link dh_fixperms dh_makeshlibs -V dh_installdeb dh_shlibdeps dh_gencontrol dh_md5sums dh_builddeb binary: binary-indep binary-arch .PHONY: build clean binary-indep binary-arch binary install configure signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Re: Re: RFS: retext
Sorry Dmitry, I'm not a DD, so I can't upload your package. Cheers, Fabrizio. Il giorno lun, 09/05/2011 alle 21.07 +0400, Dmitry Shachnev ha scritto: > Can you upload it or I should fix something else? > > 2011/5/9 Dmitry Shachnev : > > This will have no effect. > > I have already renamed that file upstream (but maybe index is not updated > > yet). > > signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: RFS: oggfix
On So, 2011-05-01 at 18:09 +0100, Michael Tautschnig wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "oggfix".
> >
> > * Package name: oggfix
> > Version : 0.9.0
> > Upstream Author : Gunter Königsmann
> > * URL : http://launchpad.net/oggfix
> > * License : GPL V3+
> > Section : sound
> >
> > It builds these binary packages:
> > oggfix - Command-line-utility that fixes broken ogg vorbis files
> >
> > The package appears to be lintian clean.
> ^
>
> No, that can't be true.
>
> - Depends lacks ${shlibs:Depends}
Fixed that on my computer.
> - No copyright and license information in source files.
Is there any fixed or recommended format for doing this?
> - debian/copyright should be DEP-5 formatted (see
> http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep5/)
Fixed that on my computer.
> - Build-Depends should not include build-essential packages.
Fixed that on my computer.
> - It sounds weird that gnome-common is needed to build a command-line utility
> for ogg files!?
Will fix that before re-uploading the file: The only thing I did use
from this package was the autogen.sh from gnome.
>
> Please address these issues and re-upload.
>
Will upload the package as soon as you tell me which format the
copyright information in the source files has to be in.
Kind regards,
Gunter.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Re: Re: RFS: retext
On Mon, May 09, 2011 at 04:07:42PM +0400, Dmitry Shachnev wrote:
> I updated the package, fixing most of things you pointed. Check it out
> (retext 1.0.1b-4).
> Some notes:
> * Lintian says I should put
> "http://sourceforge.net/retext/ReText_(.+)\.tar\.gz" [0] to
> debian/watch
> * I didn't figure out how to rename files while dh_install'ing them,
> so I have put some "mv && dh_install && mv" commands in debian/rules
You don't need to rename the files using dh_instal... just install them.
I would have put all the convert and mv commands to the build stage
(overriding dh_auto_build), e.g.:
override_dh_auto_build:
mv retext.py retext
convert -resize 16 icons/retext.svg debian/icons/16/retext.png
convert -resize 22 icons/retext.svg debian/icons/22/retext.png
[...]
override_dh_auto_clean:
dh_auto_clean
rm -rf debian/icons
rm -f retext
[...]
and then in debian/retext.install:
retext usr/bin
debian/icons/16/retext.png usr/share/icons/hicolor/16x16/apps
debian/icons/22/retext.png usr/share/icons/hicolor/22x22/apps
[...]
This IMHO has also the nice side effect of using all the major targets
(build with dh_auto_build, install with dh_install and clean with
dh_auto_clean) and not just install. But of course it's your package, not
mine :)
> * "--with python2" is needed for Python packages, retext and wpgen are
> just single files in /usr/bin
dh_python2 can be used to build Python modules and applications (read its
manpage), but it does more, it also takes care of replacing the various
${python:*} variables in debian/control. You are currently using the
${python:Depends} variable, so you should either start using dh_python2 or
remove that variable from debian/control (which is not used right now).
Cheers
--
perl -E'$_=q;$/= @{[@_]};and s;\S+;;eg;say~~reverse'
--
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/20110509182109.GA2420@PC-Ale.WAG300N
RFS: assogiate (updated package)
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.2.1-2 of my package "assogiate". It builds these binary packages: assogiate - editor of the MIME file types database The last upload was in 2008, that's why this new version updates lots of files in the debian directory. Assogiate is now dead upstream, but I would like to keep it in Debian for now. This upload fixes RC bug #624924. The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/a/assogiate - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/a/assogiate/assogiate_0.2.1-2.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Kind regards Vincent Legout -- 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/87wrhzbw63@cian.legout.info
Re: Re: Re: RFS: retext
Can you upload it or I should fix something else? 2011/5/9 Dmitry Shachnev : > This will have no effect. > I have already renamed that file upstream (but maybe index is not updated > yet). -- 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/BANLkTik1LYY-8kmjb=equ7vtj0dszeg...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Re: Re: RFS: retext
I renamed those files upstream. 2011/5/9 Fabrizio Regalli : > Hi, > > Il giorno lun, 09/05/2011 alle 16.09 +0400, Dmitry Shachnev ha scritto: >> Fix: >> * Lintian says I should put >> "http://sourceforge.net/retext/ReText_(.+)\.tar\.gz" [0] to >> debian/watch, but I don't think it works >> > > > version=3 > http://sf.net/retext/ReText_(.+)\.tar\.gz > > but it's not enough, because in the directory there are some > *icons* files. You don't need to consider it using regexp. > Please check 'man uscan' for '*mangle*': not sure but in this case you > should use it. > > Cheers, > Fabrizio. -- 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/banlktimjvtguczkk8vg2-3x5idgpqan...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Re: Re: RFS: retext
Hi, Il giorno lun, 09/05/2011 alle 16.09 +0400, Dmitry Shachnev ha scritto: > Fix: > * Lintian says I should put > "http://sourceforge.net/retext/ReText_(.+)\.tar\.gz" [0] to > debian/watch, but I don't think it works > version=3 http://sf.net/retext/ReText_(.+)\.tar\.gz but it's not enough, because in the directory there are some *icons* files. You don't need to consider it using regexp. Please check 'man uscan' for '*mangle*': not sure but in this case you should use it. Cheers, Fabrizio. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Remotely downloaded javascripts in documentation
Hello, a package of mine, sqlkit (currently only in experimental) provides a documentation in html format which, when browsed, tries to use several javacript applets which the browser retrieves from remote. Though that's a fairly common behaviour for most of the webpages we daily browse, I guess if I should disable that. In particular: 1) some applets are separately packaged: it looks trivial to me that I will patch the docs generation to use them instead 2) a .js (AnythingSlider) is not included in the tarball only because its license was unknown (now it is clarified as GPL), nor is it packaged separately. It will presumably be included in the next upstream release of sqlkit. For the moment, it and its files are retrieved from the sqlkit official page. I can't change that just with a patch, since also a couple of png images are retrieved. Well, I could introduce the .js as patch _and_ still retrieve the pngs. 3) Since the docs are used also on the project website, the Google Analytics .js is retrieved for tracking. This should be maybe also considered as a privacy threat, though I found no mention to this kind of problems in the Debian policy. Maybe my question looks a bit rhetoric, but I just want to be sure I don't patch more than it's strictly required: do I have, in the end, to remove all the references to remote .js? thanks Pietro -- 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/1304946057.4362.12.ca...@voubian.casa
Re: Re: Re: RFS: retext
Fix: * Lintian says I should put "http://sourceforge.net/retext/ReText_(.+)\.tar\.gz" [0] to debian/watch, but I don't think it works 2011/5/9 Dmitry Shachnev : > I updated the package, fixing most of things you pointed. Check it out > (retext 1.0.1b-4). > Some notes: > * Lintian says I should put > "http://sourceforge.net/retext/ReText_(.+)\.tar\.gz" [0] to > debian/watch > * I didn't figure out how to rename files while dh_install'ing them, > so I have put some "mv && dh_install && mv" commands in debian/rules > * "--with python2" is needed for Python packages, retext and wpgen are > just single files in /usr/bin > > [0] > http://lintian.debian.org/tags/debian-watch-file-should-use-sf-redirector.html > > Dmitry Shachnev > -- 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/banlktinvwjydzgvx40fwan2xpq7sz6j...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Re: Re: RFS: retext
I updated the package, fixing most of things you pointed. Check it out (retext 1.0.1b-4). Some notes: * Lintian says I should put "http://sourceforge.net/retext/ReText_(.+)\.tar\.gz" [0] to debian/watch * I didn't figure out how to rename files while dh_install'ing them, so I have put some "mv && dh_install && mv" commands in debian/rules * "--with python2" is needed for Python packages, retext and wpgen are just single files in /usr/bin [0] http://lintian.debian.org/tags/debian-watch-file-should-use-sf-redirector.html Dmitry Shachnev -- 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/BANLkTi=v9rs8lug_pka9zds6nqajmk4...@mail.gmail.com
Re: RFS: gtkpod (updated package)
On 09/05/2011 12:12, Etienne Millon wrote: > On Mon, May 09, 2011 at 11:17:38AM +0200, Matteo F. Vescovi wrote: >>> - debian/rules : >>> - why do you remove RPATHs from executables and binary ? It's stated >>> briefly >>> in NEWS.debian, but the reason is not there. >> >> Without this hack, it doesn't compile and build. I'll add a line about >> it in NEWS.Debian (or README.Debian?). > > Eventually README.Debian as it does not concern end-users. OK. Added. >>> - as libgtkpod.la is new, no reverse dependencies should depend on its >>> existence. It should be safe not to install it[1]. >> >> OK, gonna remove it. However I asked in IRC channel and they told me how >> to blank the dependency_libs field and keep the rest of the file, for >> compatibility. > > Actually there is no need to be compatible as nothing depends on it > ATM :) OK. Removed. >>> - the "README.debian" is not necessary. >> >> Really? OK. > > I mean the line in debian/changelog : it adds nothing because relevant > information is already in README.debian. I initially misread... and understood the meaning once I've opened the changelog ;-) Now I remember that I added that line because in former package there wasn't that file while I thought it could be important adding my changes there... and that was a way to let people know I also created it. Issue resolved. Thanks. Now I've updated almost all the steps you had an observation on. Thanks a lot for your review. It has been really helpful. Hope to find a sponsor, sooner or later ;-) Cheers. mfv -- Ing. Matteo F. Vescovi -- Il messaggio e' stato analizzato alla ricerca di virus o contenuti pericolosi da MailScanner, ed e' risultato non infetto. -- 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/4dc7c090.8000...@revese.it
Re: RFS: gtkpod (updated package)
On Mon, May 09, 2011 at 11:17:38AM +0200, Matteo F. Vescovi wrote: > > - debian/rules : > > - why do you remove RPATHs from executables and binary ? It's stated > > briefly > > in NEWS.debian, but the reason is not there. > > Without this hack, it doesn't compile and build. I'll add a line about > it in NEWS.Debian (or README.Debian?). Eventually README.Debian as it does not concern end-users. > > - as libgtkpod.la is new, no reverse dependencies should depend on its > > existence. It should be safe not to install it[1]. > > OK, gonna remove it. However I asked in IRC channel and they told me how > to blank the dependency_libs field and keep the rest of the file, for > compatibility. Actually there is no need to be compatible as nothing depends on it ATM :) > > - the "README.debian" is not necessary. > > Really? OK. I mean the line in debian/changelog : it adds nothing because relevant information is already in README.debian. -- Etienne Millon -- 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/20110509101220.gb5...@john.ssi.corp
Re: RFS: gtkpod (updated package)
On 09/05/2011 10:53, Etienne Millon wrote:
> Hello,
Hi!
> As the usual disclaimer says, please not that I am not a DD and so, I can not
> sponsor this package. However here is my review of gtkpod_2.0.0-1 (md5sum of
> dsc
> in case it changed : c9d4216c068873d3939f310de582c671).
>
> - it builds in a clean chroot. However dpkg-shlibdeps complains about
> unneeded
> shared libraries.
I already asked upstream for adding the --as-needed flag in linking
phase. No reply for now.
> - debian/copyright makes references to nonexistent or moved files. For
> example
> wavfile.{c,h} now live in plugins/filetype_wav, and there are no md5.{c,h}
> file. This is a blocker, you should clarify which copyright applies to
> which
> file.
I'm working on it now. I'd like to make it DEP-5 compliant.
> - debian/rules :
> - why do you remove RPATHs from executables and binary ? It's stated
> briefly
> in NEWS.debian, but the reason is not there.
Without this hack, it doesn't compile and build. I'll add a line about
it in NEWS.Debian (or README.Debian?).
> - as libgtkpod.la is new, no reverse dependencies should depend on its
> existence. It should be safe not to install it[1].
OK, gonna remove it. However I asked in IRC channel and they told me how
to blank the dependency_libs field and keep the rest of the file, for
compatibility.
> - debian/patches : please consider using the DEP-3 format[2].
OK.
> - debian/changelog :
> - as your ITA bug has been merged with the O bug, closing one should close
> the other one.
Perfect. I'll remove the latter.
> - technically, your patch system is not quilt, but the "3.0 (quilt)"
> format.
> "quilt" refers to quilt used manually against sources, or with dh --with
> quilt.
OK. I'll remove the sentence about it.
> - the "README.debian" is not necessary.
Really? OK.
> - lintian : clean upto -I. -E shows one warning : X: libgtkpod1:
> shlib-calls-exit usr/lib/gtkpod/libsorttab_display.so It's mostly
> processes
> exiting after fork(), and arguments processing. In the latter case, you
> might convince upstream to do that outside the library.
I'll try. Thanks.
> Thanks for contributing to Debian !
>
> [1] http://wiki.debian.org/ReleaseGoals/LAFileRemoval
> [2] http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep3/
mfv
--
Ing. Matteo F. Vescovi
--
Il messaggio e' stato analizzato alla ricerca di virus o
contenuti pericolosi da MailScanner, ed e'
risultato non infetto.
--
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/4dc7b132.8010...@revese.it
Re: RFS: gtkpod (updated package)
Hello,
As the usual disclaimer says, please not that I am not a DD and so, I can not
sponsor this package. However here is my review of gtkpod_2.0.0-1 (md5sum of dsc
in case it changed : c9d4216c068873d3939f310de582c671).
- it builds in a clean chroot. However dpkg-shlibdeps complains about unneeded
shared libraries.
- debian/copyright makes references to nonexistent or moved files. For example
wavfile.{c,h} now live in plugins/filetype_wav, and there are no md5.{c,h}
file. This is a blocker, you should clarify which copyright applies to which
file.
- debian/rules :
- why do you remove RPATHs from executables and binary ? It's stated briefly
in NEWS.debian, but the reason is not there.
- as libgtkpod.la is new, no reverse dependencies should depend on its
existence. It should be safe not to install it[1].
- debian/patches : please consider using the DEP-3 format[2].
- debian/changelog :
- as your ITA bug has been merged with the O bug, closing one should close
the other one.
- technically, your patch system is not quilt, but the "3.0 (quilt)" format.
"quilt" refers to quilt used manually against sources, or with dh --with
quilt.
- the "README.debian" is not necessary.
- lintian : clean upto -I. -E shows one warning : X: libgtkpod1:
shlib-calls-exit usr/lib/gtkpod/libsorttab_display.so It's mostly processes
exiting after fork(), and arguments processing. In the latter case, you
might convince upstream to do that outside the library.
Thanks for contributing to Debian !
[1] http://wiki.debian.org/ReleaseGoals/LAFileRemoval
[2] http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep3/
--
Etienne Millon
--
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/20110509085329.ga5...@john.ssi.corp
Re: New contributors: please come to Debconf and/or Debcamp
Asheesh, Thank you for this email, I couldn't agree more with everything you said. Just wanted to send an update that we extended sponsored registrations until May 19th so there's still time to register! I personally would like to encourage everybody to register and request sponsorship, see you in Banja Luka! Adnan Sent using Android (Nexus S) On May 7, 2011 7:35 PM, "Asheesh Laroia" wrote: > Hi everyone on debian-mentors, > > I wanted to send a special invitation for new contributors to Debian: Come > to Debconf and Debcamp! Even if you're not a Debian Developer yet. > > Here are the things you need to know: > > * Debconf is a week-long conference (this year, in Banja Luka, in Bosnia) > where many Debian contributors and some Debian users discuss the present > and future for Debian. > > * It is also the most continuous fun I ever have in a week. > > * The first Debconf I went to (in 2008) I was not a Debian Developer yet. > At first, I felt timid about participating, but everyone was so > exceedingly friendly that I quickly became a loudmouth. (-: > > * The sponsored registration deadline is tomorrow: > http://debconf11.debconf.org/dates.xhtml -- SOON! > > * If you contribute to Debian, like by maintaining packages, just indicate > what you do (for example, "QA work sometimes" and maybe a link to the > patches you have submitted) in the registration form. > > * Debcamp is a week-long hack fest, before Debconf, and if you want to get > things done in Debian before Debconf, please come to that, too! > > Your registration will be free of cost if you sign up within the next day, > by Sun May 8. that's pretty soon! > > Around this time, three years ago, I tiptoed onto the #debian-devel IRC > channel and asked, "Should I go to Debconf?" I was overwhelmed with > positive responses. I took a chance and decided to go. It was *so* worth > it. > > PLEASE JOIN US! It'll be totally great. > > -- > -- Asheesh. > > http://asheesh.org/ > > Avoid reality at all costs. > > > -- > 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/alpine.deb.2.00.1105071127270.28...@rose.makesad.us >
