Re: RFS: homebank (updated package)
Hi Dne Sun, 20 Mar 2011 19:47:43 +0200 Andrey vorono...@gmail.com napsal(a): I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 4.4-0.1 of my package homebank. It builds these binary packages: homebank - Manage your personal accounts at home homebank-data - Data files for homebank The package appears to be lintian clean. The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/h/homebank - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/h/homebank/homebank_4.4-0.1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. What is reason for NMU without closing single bug report on the package? Also NMU is not expected to make such invasive changes as changing source format. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: debsigs (updated, DMUA candidate :)
Hi Dne Tue, 1 Mar 2011 13:47:11 +0200 Peter Pentchev r...@ringlet.net napsal(a): I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.1.17 of my package debsigs. This version contains various packaging refreshments (see below for the changelog entry). Looks good, uploaded. Also, I'd be grateful if a kind mentor would set the DM-Upload-Allowed flag before uploading :) Sorry not for now, I need more than one upload to do this :-). -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: gpick
Hi Dne Thu, 24 Feb 2011 10:03:34 -0500 Elías Alejandro eal...@gmail.com napsal(a): The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/gpick - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/gpick/gpick_0.2.3-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. It fails to build for me: Linking == build/source/gpick /usr/bin/ld: build/source/dynv/DynvXml.o: undefined reference to symbol 'XML_GetBuffer' /usr/bin/ld: note: 'XML_GetBuffer' is defined in DSO //usr/lib64/libexpat.so.1 so try adding it to the linker command line //usr/lib64/libexpat.so.1: could not read symbols: Invalid operation collect2: ld returned 1 exit status scons: *** [build/source/gpick] Error 1 It seems to be related to binutils upgrade, for details, please see: http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2011/02/msg00011.html http://wiki.debian.org/ToolChain/DSOLinking -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Manual usage of quilt does not work any more
Hi Dne Sun, 20 Feb 2011 23:30:33 +0100 Andreas Tille andr...@an3as.eu napsal(a): I'm currently totally clueless in the following situation: I took a random package I'm maintaining (at least it is the case for three totally unrelated packages), say texmaker. I obtained the source tarball, untarred it and copied the debian/ dir from SVN into it. Then I tried: /tmp/texmaker/texmaker-2.2.1$ quilt push Applying patch 10_spelling_dict.patch patch: unrecognized option '--unified-reject-files' patch: Try `patch --help' for more information. Patch 10_spelling_dict.patch does not apply (enforce with -f) I have no idea at all why the patch does not apply because /tmp/texmaker/texmaker-2.2.1$ patch -p1 debian/patches/10_spelling_dict.patch patching file configdialog.cpp works perfectly fine. If I unpack the source via /tmp/texmaker$ dpkg-source -x texmaker_2.2.1-1.dsc dpkg-source: info: extracting texmaker in texmaker-2.2.1 dpkg-source: info: unpacking texmaker_2.2.1.orig.tar.bz2 dpkg-source: info: unpacking texmaker_2.2.1-1.debian.tar.bz2 dpkg-source: info: applying 10_spelling_dict.patch dpkg-source: info: applying spelling-error-in-binary.patch the patches are applied, however I can not unpatch: /tmp/texmaker/texmaker-2.2.1$ quilt applied 10_spelling_dict.patch spelling-error-in-binary.patch /tmp/texmaker/texmaker-2.2.1$ quilt pop -a Patch spelling-error-in-binary.patch does not remove cleanly (refresh it or enforce with -f) The hint for refreshing or enforcing with -f is not helpful at all. My ~/.quiltrc is QUILT_DIFF_ARGS=--no-timestamps --no-index QUILT_REFRESH_ARGS=--no-timestamps --no-index QUILT_PATCH_OPTS=--unified-reject-files And you should disable this line as this is the one causing your troubles... (for long story, read patch changelog) -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: discount - Implementation of Markdown markup language in C
Hi Dne Wed, 19 Jan 2011 08:25:10 -0800 (PST) Alessandro Ghedini al3x...@gmail.com napsal(a): The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/d/discount - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/d/discount/discount_2.0.4-1.dsc or: - http://git.debian.org/?p=collab-maint/discount.git;a=summary - git clone git://git.debian.org/collab-maint/discount.git I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Looks good, uploaded. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: monit (updated package)
Hi Dne Sun, 16 Jan 2011 13:54:27 +0300 Sergey B Kirpichev skirpic...@gmail.com napsal(a): The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/monit - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/monit/monit_5.2.3-1.dsc Few comments: - You don't need README.source for 3.0 source packages. - Please rename and document debian-changes-1:5.2.3-1 patch - Please document why is needed lintian override in debian/monit.lintian-overrides There are also some Information/Pedantic lintian warnings: P: monit: copyright-refers-to-symlink-license usr/share/common-licenses/GPL P: monit: no-homepage-field I: monit: spelling-error-in-manpage usr/share/man/man1/monit.1.gz usualy usually I: monit: spelling-error-in-manpage usr/share/man/man1/monit.1.gz overriden overridden I: monit: possible-documentation-but-no-doc-base-registration I: monit: spelling-error-in-binary ./usr/sbin/monit informations information I: monit: spelling-error-in-binary ./usr/sbin/monit dependant dependent I: monit: spelling-error-in-binary ./usr/sbin/monit dependant dependent I: monit: spelling-error-in-binary ./usr/sbin/monit dependant dependent I: monit: spelling-error-in-binary ./usr/sbin/monit dependant dependent At least home page could be added and license should be fixed, especially as the program is GPL3+. Registering documentation in doc-base is good idea as well. You might consider reporting typos to upstream. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: monit (updated package)
hi Dne Mon, 17 Jan 2011 16:47:02 +0300 Sergey B Kirpichev skirpic...@gmail.com napsal(a): Michal, thank you for reply and suggestions. Few comments: - You don't need README.source for 3.0 source packages. - Please document why is needed lintian override in debian/monit.lintian-overrides Done - Please rename and document debian-changes-1:5.2.3-1 patch P: monit: copyright-refers-to-symlink-license usr/share/common-licenses/GPL P: monit: no-homepage-field Fixed. http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/monit The respective dsc file can be found at: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/monit/monit_5.2.3-1.dsc I: monit: spelling-error-in-manpage usr/share/man/man1/monit.1.gz usualy usually I: monit: spelling-error-in-manpage usr/share/man/man1/monit.1.gz overriden overridden I: monit: spelling-error-in-binary ./usr/sbin/monit informations information I: monit: spelling-error-in-binary ./usr/sbin/monit dependant dependent I: monit: spelling-error-in-binary ./usr/sbin/monit dependant dependent I: monit: spelling-error-in-binary ./usr/sbin/monit dependant dependent I: monit: spelling-error-in-binary ./usr/sbin/monit dependant dependent You might consider reporting typos to upstream. It's easy to fix, but definitely should go upstream. I: monit: possible-documentation-but-no-doc-base-registration There is no documentation, except manpage. There is /usr/share/doc/monit/monit.html . It might have same content as man page, but I still think it is worth registering it into doc-base. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: git (updated package)
Hi Dne Thu, 16 Dec 2010 02:50:56 -0600 Jonathan Nieder jrnie...@gmail.com napsal(a): I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 1:1.7.2.3-2.2 of the package git. It builds these binary packages: git- fast, scalable, distributed revision control system git-all- fast, scalable, distributed revision control system (all subpacka git-arch - fast, scalable, distributed revision control system (arch interop git-core - fast, scalable, distributed revision control system (obsolete) git-cvs- fast, scalable, distributed revision control system (cvs interope git-daemon-run - fast, scalable, distributed revision control system (git-daemon s git-doc- fast, scalable, distributed revision control system (documentatio git-email - fast, scalable, distributed revision control system (email add-on git-gui- fast, scalable, distributed revision control system (GUI) git-svn- fast, scalable, distributed revision control system (svn interope gitk - fast, scalable, distributed revision control system (revision tre gitweb - fast, scalable, distributed revision control system (web interfac The upload would fix these bugs: 607248 There is the usual list of complaints from lintian, all known and mostly harmless. This is a non-maintainer upload to fix a security bug in preparation for squeeze, so it didn't seem like the right time to fix them. Gerrit is on vacation (see debian-private) so again I am counting on you. The package can be found at the usual place. - git://repo.or.cz/debian-git/jrn.git squeeze-urgent - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/git/git_1.7.2.3-2.2.dsc I would be happy if someone finds time to look it over. Looks good, uploaded. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: LeechCraft
Hi Dne Thu, 16 Dec 2010 15:32:39 +0300 Daniel Guzanoff melkor...@gmail.com napsal(a): Thanks for comments. We will work with the technical defects and license. Why is the package limited to the i386 and amd64 architectures? This application isn't tested on other architectures. I was going to add new architectures after testing these. Is this a bad idea? The usual way is to build for all architectures unless there is really some platform specific code. Testing is welcome, but it's hard to get access to all Debian architectures (especially if you are not DD). And if something breaks, you will get a bug report :-). -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: sima (autoqueue MPD client, find similar artists to queue)
Hi Dne Sat, 13 Nov 2010 15:55:49 +0100 Geoffroy Youri Berret ef...@azylum.org napsal(a): Le 12/11/2010 10:55, Michal Čihař a écrit : Dne Fri, 12 Nov 2010 10:30:51 +0100 Geoffroy Youri Berret ef...@azylum.org napsal(a): The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/sima - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/sima/sima_0.6.0-1.dsc The upstream tarball name is mpd_sima, maybe you want to name source package same way? Why have you modified the source tarball? I thought the underscore is not allowed. http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-controlfields.html#s-f-Source Anyone to confirm? You're right, but mpd-sima would work :-). Anyway it is not reason to recompress the tarball, dpkg-source renames in on unpacking, so you don't have to care about top level directory name -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: sima (autoqueue MPD client, find similar artists to queue)
Hi Dne Fri, 12 Nov 2010 10:30:51 +0100 Geoffroy Youri Berret ef...@azylum.org napsal(a): The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/sima - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/sima/sima_0.6.0-1.dsc The upstream tarball name is mpd_sima, maybe you want to name source package same way? Why have you modified the source tarball? You shoudn't list debian/changelog.gz in debian/docs. You should install examples by dh_installexamples (or debian/examples) not by debian/docs. Why you manually compress changelog in debian/rules? You should rather use dh_installchangelogs for installing it. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Time of a package to be processed by FTP-masters
Hi Dne Wed, 27 Oct 2010 15:50:16 +0200 Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo manuel.montez...@gmail.com napsal(a): The matter is that I got a new version of an existing package compiled and uploaded by a sponsor (I'm just DM so I can't directly upload my stuff), and the package is stuck in the new queue of the ftp masters machine for two weeks. I realize that there are a lot of packages to be processed, some in the queue older than mine, but most of those have several versions uploaded which indicate that maybe they have packaging problems, and many packages newer than mine were already processed in this time lapse. The previous packages that I had created and needed to go in the new queue were processed within a couple of days. I guess the problem is that people are now more focused on getting release out than on adding more packages. So for now try to help with that as well, find some RC bug and fix it. Once the release is out, your packages in NEW will get processed faster :-). 1- If this is normal, or if having to wait for 1 week indicates that the package has some kind of problem. AFAIR the wait time was most time much above 1 week, it only got improved in last year. Actually see yourself how the size of NEW queue changes: http://molly.corsac.net/~corsac/debian/new/ 2- In the latter case, do FTP contact you (even by receiving some kind of REJECT notification), or are you supposed to ask them what's the problem after some time? You get a REJECT notification or even just a question to clarify some things. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: nanoblogger (updated package)
Hi Dne Mon, 11 Oct 2010 06:45:56 -0500 William Vera bi...@billy.com.mx napsal(a): I have a particular fondness for this package because it was mi first package in debian (more than 5 years) :) Yes I've noticed this. Do you think you have now enough time to spend on package? (AFAIR it was orphaned after you being inactive for some time.) The SNV headers was removed from control files and both packages are re-uploaded to mentors.d.n Okay. PS: No need to CC me on reply. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: nanoblogger (updated package)
Hi Dne Tue, 19 Oct 2010 10:37:17 + William Vera bi...@billy.com.mx napsal(a): Sure I have enough time for the package! :) Okay, I hope it will end up better now :-). Both packages uploaded. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: nanoblogger (updated package)
Hi Dne Fri, 8 Oct 2010 13:01:54 -0500 William Vera bi...@billy.com.mx napsal(a): Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 3.4.2-3 of my package nanoblogger. It builds these binary packages: nanoblogger - Small weblog engine for the command line The package appears to be lintian clean. The upload would fix these bugs: 599288 The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/n/nanoblogger - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/n/nanoblogger/nanoblogger_3.4.2-3.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Thanks for taking care of this package. As I've mentioned in RFA, the package sources are in collab-maint svn, so either please use that svn and use Vcs-* headers for it, or completely remove current ones (the same applies to nanoblogger-extra package). -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Four days
Hi Dne Mon, 4 Oct 2010 11:42:59 -0400 Michael Gilbert michael.s.gilb...@gmail.com napsal(a): On Mon, 04 Oct 2010 11:35:04 +1100, Ben Finney wrote: Michael Gilbert michael.s.gilb...@gmail.com writes: As someone who has attempted to go through the mentoring process, I agree very much that it is rather depressing. How much of that is actually a problem, though? How much is an integral part of gaining humility as to the state of the packaging work, and the pain of learning new conventions and processes? The depressing part is that almost no one is interested in being a mentor, so its almost impossible to get your work into Debian, which makes the effort seem pointless. Note that I've actually succeeded many times, but I've also failed many times as well. And the failures are all due to lack of an interested mentor, not due to package quality (a bunch of my packages are on mentors.debian.net and lintian clean). Lack of interested mentors is indeed an issue. Nobody has unlimited time and chooses what attracts him. For me it usually means things I know and test or which I find interesting after reading RFS email. The level of this of course depends how heavy I am loaded with other tasks (what currently means that it is unlikely that some new package would attract my attention). I think that the efficiency of mentoring is the problem that needs to be solved. That could possibly be improved by treating mentoring tasks as bugs. Well it would be definitely useful having better tracked package reviews and problems found on earlier upload, so that it is clearly visible if there are still some not fixed issues. [1]:http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2010/07/msg00183.html -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: matrixssl
Hi Dne Mon, 04 Oct 2010 11:57:44 -0400 z...@gnu.org napsal(a): I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 3.1.2-2 of my package matrixssl. It builds these binary packages: libmatrixssl3.1 - small SSL library optimized for embedded systems libmatrixssl3.1-dev - small SSL library optimized for embedded systems (development fil libmatrixssl3.1-doc - small SSL library optimized for embedded systems (documentation) The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/matrixssl - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/matrixssl/matrixssl_3.1.2-2.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. It would be great if you've mentioned some other details in the RFS email - It is new package? Are you adopting it? What is your motivation to take care of this package? Does the upload fix any bugs? Quick look at the package: 1. It is orphaned package, you seem to want to addopt it, so why your latest changelog entry mentions NMU? 2. This seems to be quite major version update, are you sure you want to upload this to unstable in freeze? 3. You dropped dietlibc support without single mention in changelog/NEWS 4. Manually creating postinst/postrm is really not needed, just use debhelper. 5. Why is there another tarball and debian directory in .orig.tar.gz? Please check how the source package should look like. 6. Ever heard about lintian? I: matrixssl source: binary-control-field-duplicates-source field section in package libmatrixssl3.1 I: matrixssl source: duplicate-long-description libmatrixssl3.1-dev libmatrixssl3.1 libmatrixssl3.1-doc I: matrixssl source: missing-debian-source-format W: matrixssl source: changelog-should-not-mention-nmu I: matrixssl source: debian-watch-file-is-missing -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: matrixssl
Hi please keep the discussion on the list. Dne Mon, 04 Oct 2010 16:45:32 -0400 z...@gnu.org napsal(a): Michal Čihař ni...@debian.org writes: Hi! It would be great if you've mentioned some other details in the RFS email - It is new package? Are you adopting it? What is your motivation to take care of this package? Does the upload fix any bugs? No this package isn't new, in fact exist a previous version 1.8.8 which the current maintainer ask for someone to maintain, I'm responding to that bug 544057[1]. I want this package to be updated in Debian because I just finish the ssl plugin for the monkey http daemon project and it will use this version of matrixssl since the current (1.8.8) doesn't work so well. Great, it would be nice to know this in first email. Quick look at the package: 1. It is orphaned package, you seem to want to addopt it, so why your latest changelog entry mentions NMU? This it's the funny part, I had some troubles trying to understand what's the NMU didn't find a place to understand and then fix this issue. See http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/pkgs.html#nmu. 2. This seems to be quite major version update, are you sure you want to upload this to unstable in freeze? What do you mean with unstable in freeze? If you think that it should be in other place just tell me and we will put it in other place. Generally uploading new library version to unstable while freeze is not a good idea. See freeze announcement for more details - http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2010/08/msg0.html. 3. You dropped dietlibc support without single mention in changelog/NEWS Didn't know if you should mention that or where mention it, maybe I should not drop the support, whats your thoughts about it? I have no idea whether it was used or not, but it seems like some major feature removal, so it would deserve at least note in changelog or NEWS, see http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/best-pkging-practices.html#bpp-news-debian. 4. Manually creating postinst/postrm is really not needed, just use debhelper. Ok, I'll take a more deep look on all the tools of debhelper maybe I missed something. 5. Why is there another tarball and debian directory in .orig.tar.gz? Please check how the source package should look like. I was running a command to generate de .origin.tar.gz maybe I forgot some option to run, I'll check more about that You don't need to generate orig.tar.gz, that should be just renamed upstream tarball. 6. Ever heard about lintian? I: matrixssl source: binary-control-field-duplicates-source field section in package libmatrixssl3.1 I: matrixssl source: duplicate-long-description libmatrixssl3.1-dev libmatrixssl3.1 libmatrixssl3.1-doc I: matrixssl source: missing-debian-source-format W: matrixssl source: changelog-should-not-mention-nmu I: matrixssl source: debian-watch-file-is-missing Of course, but I didn't saw those problems, can you send me the options I should use ? The I: warnings are generated by passing -I option to lintian. They are usually good things to fix, but not necessarily a bugs. I sent a RFS a few weeks ago with more details I think[2], thanks for you fast answer, [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=544057 [2] http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2010/09/msg00175.html -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: pstotext
Hi Dne Sun, 4 Jul 2010 03:31:43 +0200 Jan Jeroným Zvánovec j...@zvano.net napsal(a): I have just re-uploaded the package with the more important issues (policy version, watch file and patch system) fixed. Please also adjust patch comments to match DEP-3 http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep3/. I do not believe that the small reenable/re-enable typo (in comment!) is worth patching and I cannot make up non-existent upstream changelog, so I did not utilize the last two hints. But you can tell upstream about that. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: pstotext
Hi Dne Fri, 2 Jul 2010 14:23:55 +0200 Jan Jeroným Zvánovec j...@zvano.net napsal(a): It builds this binary package: pstotext - Extract text from PostScript and PDF files The package appears to be lintian clean. The upload would fix these bugs: 289097, 539671, 585061, 586914 of which I consider 539671 and 586914 urgent. The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/pstotext - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/pstotext/pstotext_1.9-5.dsc Few comments: - You should use current policy, now it is 3.9.0 - There are some minor lintian hints: P: pstotext source: direct-changes-in-diff-but-no-patch-system main.c and 1 more I: pstotext source: debian-watch-file-is-missing P: pstotext: no-upstream-changelog I: pstotext: spelling-error-in-binary ./usr/bin/pstotext reenable re-enable -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: mpg321 (new upstream release with AudioScrobbler FFT support)
Hi Dne Thu, 1 Jul 2010 17:38:40 +0300 Nanakos Chrysostomos nana...@wired-net.gr napsal(a): The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/mpg321 - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/mpg321/mpg321_0.2.12-1.dsc Okay, uploaded. However you should look into following issues for future (mostly because they are in the package already for some time): - it seems to use embedded getopt copy, please use the one from glibc - you don't mention LGPL in debian/copyright what is license of getopt -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: mpg321 (updated package with AudioScrobbler FFT support, DM-Upload-Allowed flag removed, 2nd try)
Hi Dne Tue, 29 Jun 2010 22:02:56 +0300 Nanakos Chrysostomos nana...@wired-net.gr napsal(a): The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/mpg321 - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/mpg321/mpg321_0.2.11-4.dsc - what is reason for removing -Wall from compiler flags? - you should add fft.c copyright information to debian/copyright And what is actually motivation for adding features in Debian patches instead of making new upstream release? -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Packages with DMUA but no DM (was: Re: RFS: mpg321 (updated package with AudioScrobbler support))
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Dne Sat, 26 Jun 2010 21:45:25 -0500 Raphael Geissert geiss...@debian.org napsal(a): -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Paul Wise wrote: On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 8:42 AM, Nanakos Chrysostomos nana...@wired-net.gr wrote: I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.2.11-4 of my package mpg321. According to the PTS the package has DMUA set on it, so you should be able to build and upload it yourself. Except that Nanakos isn't a DM according to [1] and [2], which makes me wonder why Michal sponsored an upload that sets the field. I really did not check whether he is DM, sorry. I've already uploaded few version of mpg321 and though it would be okay to keep DMUA there. I just did not expect somebody would add DMUA while not being DM ... lesson learned. - -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.15 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkwobxgACgkQ3DVS6DbnVgTXqQCeNRzM8oew/poJnV9fcfzl61PU pB8AnjVZoqBDVAAYrUtHKlBSiB0Svoa0 =qpRx -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Packages with DMUA but no DM (was: Re: RFS: mpg321 (updated package with AudioScrobbler support))
Hi Dne Mon, 28 Jun 2010 12:57:22 +0200 Pietro Battiston m...@pietrobattiston.it napsal(a): Il giorno lun, 28/06/2010 alle 11.44 +0200, Michal Čihař ha scritto: [...] I just did not expect somebody would add DMUA while not being DM ... lesson learned. Just curiosity, but... which lesson? Because I should check it more carefully. I mean: couldn't a DD say I trust you for this package but you're still not DM - I set the flag so it's useful in case you become it?! Is the problem that it's unsecure to trust an email address which key is still not officially known to Debian? I think the biggest problem is that it is confusing - eg. PTS shows this information and make people think there is no need to sponsor this package (like it happened now). -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: egroupware (fixes critical bug)
Hi Dne Mon, 21 Jun 2010 13:57:05 +0200 Lars Volker l...@lekv.de napsal(a): thank you for your replies. I'd like to comment on some of the questions raised. First let me note, that I see two basic kinds of objections: - Objections related to the packages themselves: Those mainly arise from the fact, that Peter had invested *a lot* of work into the packaging process, some of which I might not have perfectly understood from the beginning. Thus for example I removed the watch file - not knowing, that lintian will complain in --pedantic mode. Also I acknowledged Peter's work, when I ignored most of the lintian warnings originating from his packages. If they were included before - so I thought - they can't be that important. Partially I still believe that if they weren't a big show stopper before, they shouldn't be now. However I intend to fix them over the time of continuous maintenance. Well the thing is that lot of checks (eg. embedded libraries) are quite new to lintian and because of this it did not complain on the package in the past. Right now much higher attention is given to this check mostly because of security reasons. Also checks for debian/copyright are much stricter these days than it used to be in past, so for any new package (what egroupware in fact is), you need to pay lot of attention when collecting this data. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: egroupware (fixes critical bug)
-file usr/share/egroupware/projectmanager/inc/ttf-bitstream-vera-1.10/VeraSe.ttf also in ttf-bitstream-vera W: egroupware-projectmanager: duplicate-font-file usr/share/egroupware/projectmanager/inc/ttf-bitstream-vera-1.10/VeraSeBd.ttf also in ttf-bitstream-vera P: egroupware-registration: no-upstream-changelog P: egroupware-resources: no-upstream-changelog P: egroupware-sambaadmin: no-upstream-changelog P: egroupware-sitemgr: no-upstream-changelog P: egroupware-timesheet: no-upstream-changelog P: egroupware-tracker: no-upstream-changelog P: egroupware-wiki: no-upstream-changelog N: 8 tags overridden (1 error, 7 warnings) -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: mpg321 (updated package)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Dne Mon, 24 May 2010 13:32:12 +0300 Nanakos Chrysostomos nana...@wired-net.gr napsal(a): I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.2.11-3 of my package mpg321. It builds these binary packages: mpg321 - Simple and lighweight command line MP3 player The package appears to be lintian clean. The upload would fix these bugs: 182122, 197726, 286176, 388587, 575836, 580062, 580193 The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/mpg321 - - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/mpg321/mpg321_0.2.11-3.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Looks good, uploaded. thanks - -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.15 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkv6Y60ACgkQ3DVS6DbnVgTcZgCgqXHoroh++q8HfZs6Q1jKK4DA QX8An0cRdY+zxMahJSxkycaXC9UK1RiG =kZYi -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: RFS: mpg321 (updated package)
Hi Dne Mon, 24 May 2010 13:55:01 +0200 Sandro Tosi mo...@debian.org napsal(a): I saw you sponsored mpg321. I didn't see a reply here, so I just report what i've found now. I sent an reply just before uploading the package, probably delayed because of greylisting on liszt.debian.org. Closing bugs in debian/changelog has to be done only if the current upload fixes those bugs; entries like: * Bug #182122 should close now because in this version of Debian we don't face such problems. So i am closing this bug. (Closes: Bug#182122). ... * Tried to reproduce the same experiment as Bug #388587 and i don't see any problem. If someone else can simulate the same problem, please report the bug and the way to simulate it again.So i am closing thsi bug also. (Closes: Bug#388587) ... * Anyone who wants to use the -a option can follow the information from the manpage. To give an example: mpg321 -a /dev/dsp song.mp3. So Bug #286176 should close.The -a option seems to work fine. (Closes: Bug#286176). seems very much something that should have been done via mailing to BTS and not via debian/changelog. I think it's perfectly fine to close the bug when it can not be reproduced anymore. Doing it using separate mail would be probably cleaner, but I don't think it hurts that much. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: openssl and MIT license ?
Hi Dne Sat, 20 Mar 2010 12:54:04 +0100 Jérémy Lal je...@edagames.com napsal(a): i'm the maintainer of nodejs (MIT license), and upstream author announced he is willing to switch to openssl. I know there are issues with the GPL license and the openSSL license, so i wonder if : - the openSSL license is compatible with the MIT license ? Knowing that the code linking to openSSL will be MIT licensed. Some other portions of nodejs are GPL. - the debian packaging work itself is GPL-2, i guess there's nothing wrong with that ? It is usual to have packaging under same license as upstream uses. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: sweethome3d
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Dne Wed, 3 Mar 2010 09:46:35 +0100 Michal Čihař ni...@debian.org napsal(a): http://poisson.phc.unipi.it/~mascellani/debian/freehep-xml_2.1.2+dfsg1-2.dsc http://poisson.phc.unipi.it/~mascellani/debian/freehep-graphicsio-svg_2.1.1-1.dsc Okay, I'm probably doing something wrong here, but it fails to build: dh_testroot You must specify a valid JAVA_HOME or JAVACMD! make: *** [maven-sanity-check] Error 1 dpkg-buildpackage: error: fakeroot debian/rules clean gave error exit status 2 Full pbuilder log: http://tmp.cihar.com/freehep-xml_2.1.2+dfsg1-2_amd64.build The debian/rules seem to set JAVA_HOME := /usr/lib/jvm/default-java, which is non existing on my system. Okay, the bug is that default-jdk should be in Build-Depends and not in Build-Depends-Indep, because it is required for clean. - -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.13 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkuOJE8ACgkQ3DVS6DbnVgTdmQCdGbnt+ADHwNMw7d/jjn662oZy SsMAniLGvV0d583sRuQqVfKPE+PBbJuF =E9+/ -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: RFS: sweethome3d
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Dne Mon, 01 Mar 2010 19:01:36 +0100 Gabriele Giacone 1o5g4...@gmail.com napsal(a): On 03/01/2010 08:51 AM, Michal Čihař wrote: The package is lintian clean and needs freehep-xml and freehep-graphicsio-svg which are in NEW. For upload man would need those packages to test and build, can you please provide them somewhere? http://poisson.phc.unipi.it/~mascellani/debian/freehep-xml_2.1.2+dfsg1-2.dsc http://poisson.phc.unipi.it/~mascellani/debian/freehep-graphicsio-svg_2.1.1-1.dsc Okay, I'm probably doing something wrong here, but it fails to build: dh_testroot You must specify a valid JAVA_HOME or JAVACMD! make: *** [maven-sanity-check] Error 1 dpkg-buildpackage: error: fakeroot debian/rules clean gave error exit status 2 Full pbuilder log: http://tmp.cihar.com/freehep-xml_2.1.2+dfsg1-2_amd64.build The debian/rules seem to set JAVA_HOME := /usr/lib/jvm/default-java, which is non existing on my system. - -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.13 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkuOIesACgkQ3DVS6DbnVgSA5ACbBfeXRaWgdKNC425IawWUGo7P 2ssAn1Xbt6Pnfh+ZxLBuqkG0wlH4wLaC =8jHg -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: RFS: sweethome3d
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Dne Wed, 03 Mar 2010 12:09:50 +0100 Gabriele Giacone 1o5g4...@gmail.com napsal(a): On 03/03/2010 09:56 AM, Michal Čihař wrote: Okay, the bug is that default-jdk should be in Build-Depends and not in Build-Depends-Indep, because it is required for clean. It seems you're not satisfying build dependencies (d-bp with -d option?). /usr/lib/jvm/default-java is included in default-jre-headless and default-jdk is a builddep that depends on default-jre that depends on default-jre-headless. No, please read: http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-relationships.html#s-sourcebinarydeps The problem is that default-jdk is listed in Build-Depends-Indep, while it should be in Build-Depends because it is also required for clean target of debian/rules. - -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.13 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkuOZqYACgkQ3DVS6DbnVgQZhgCeL2f/4TGAH5lGQDMzTywQzXua +R4An1nIzTZgv1nUwzF1ZXkymonkoPdg =Pcna -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: RFS: sweethome3d
Hi Dne Wed, 03 Mar 2010 16:56:23 +0100 Giovanni Mascellani mascell...@poisson.phc.unipi.it napsal(a): On Wed, 3 Mar 2010 14:39:50 +0100, Michal Čihař ni...@debian.org wrote: No, please read: http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-relationships.html#s-sourcebinarydeps The problem is that default-jdk is listed in Build-Depends-Indep, while it should be in Build-Depends because it is also required for clean target of debian/rules. I'm not sure: my packages build-depend on maven-debian-helper, which in turn depends on openjdk-6-jre | java2-runtime. Right now, I have no possibility But maven-debian-helper does not depend default-jdk and you set JAVA_HOME to path provided by default-jdk. And you call maven in clean rule, at which time Build-Depends-Indep does not have to be provided, so it is missing and maven fails. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: sweethome3d
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Dne Tue, 02 Mar 2010 10:39:10 +0100 Gabriele Giacone 1o5g4...@gmail.com napsal(a): Actual before or after our choice? We are redistributing it and we can choose whether releasing it under version 2 or 3. What reason for that? Why not? Is GPL-2 better than GPL-3? I'm trying to understand differences between them. For example because GPL-3 is not compatible with GPL-2 by itself. So once the code is under GPL-3 you can not use it in GPL-2 licensed program. Also I don't see reason why you should limit Debian users from use the program under terms of GPL-2. Why do you install startup script to usr/share/sweethome3d and create symlink in usr/bin? I think it should be directly in usr/bin. I already did it for jxplorer: link without .sh extension under /usr/bin that refers to the script under share/application /usr/bin/sweethome3d - ../share/sweethome3d/sweethome3d.sh I like it but we can talk about it. Well I feel the symlink and different location is useless, but I'd like to use package.install or dh_install but they don't rename files. Possibly without install -d/install stuff. And sweethome3d.jar was also feeling alone under /usr/share/sweethome3d ;) Okay, this is just matter of preferences. - -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkuM4usACgkQ3DVS6DbnVgRWRQCgxrnhfIv2zDqO0ZIncr0LLxhD zpUAoN7U3a67/eDkYYbDcuLGfhICpKNI =R0jq -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: RFS: sweethome3d
Hi Dne Sun, 28 Feb 2010 17:56:24 +0100 Gabriele Giacone 1o5g4...@gmail.com napsal(a): * Package name: sweethome3d Version : 2.2+dfsg-1 Upstream Author : Emmanuel Puybaret, eTeks i...@eteks.com * URL : http://www.sweethome3d.eu/ * License : GPL-3+ The license seems to be GPL-2+ (at least all file headers I checked say so). Please fix it in debian/copyright. The package is lintian clean and needs freehep-xml and freehep-graphicsio-svg which are in NEW. For upload man would need those packages to test and build, can you please provide them somewhere? The upload would fix these bugs: 475922 http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/sweethome3d/sweethome3d_2.2+dfsg-1.dsc I would be glad if someone reviewed and possibly uploaded this package for me. Few questions about the package: Why is needed 01noMacOSX? All MacOSX code seems to be behind if, so it should be safe to stay, or am I wrong? Why do you install startup script to usr/share/sweethome3d and create symlink in usr/bin? I think it should be directly in usr/bin. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: sweethome3d
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Dne Mon, 01 Mar 2010 19:01:36 +0100 Gabriele Giacone 1o5g4...@gmail.com napsal(a): On 03/01/2010 08:51 AM, Michal Čihař wrote: The license seems to be GPL-2+ (at least all file headers I checked say so). Please fix it in debian/copyright. you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version. At our option, we can choose GPL-3+, can't we? What would be the reason for that? Yes, technically you can, but you are supposed to describe actual license in debian/copyright. Why is needed 01noMacOSX? All MacOSX code seems to be behind if, so it should be safe to stay, or am I wrong? Removed some references to MacOSX code. Without those removals, build fails due to classes included in AppleJavaExtension.jar which I didn't replace. I didn't take a deeper look at it. I would be good idea to document this in patch description. It's always good to mention why the patch is needed when it is not obvious. Why do you install startup script to usr/share/sweethome3d and create symlink in usr/bin? I think it should be directly in usr/bin. I already did it for jxplorer: link without .sh extension under /usr/bin that refers to the script under share/application /usr/bin/sweethome3d - ../share/sweethome3d/sweethome3d.sh I like it but we can talk about it. Well I feel the symlink and different location is useless, but - -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkuMTR8ACgkQ3DVS6DbnVgSt+gCgzfO+9klB27LQJzYgt+wske52 KOgAnjAftAGIOTRTSYVy3jaHJ3S9Lq5y =KvGe -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: RFS: mpg321 (updated package)
Hi Dne Sun, 21 Feb 2010 17:50:17 +0200 Nanakos Chrysostomos debian_...@wired-net.gr napsal(a): I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.2.11-2 of my package mpg321. It builds these binary packages: mpg321 - Simple and lighweight command line MP3 player The package appears to be lintian clean. The upload would fix these bugs: 166512, 533671, 566544, 567104 The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/mpg321 - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/mpg321/mpg321_0.2.11-2.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Looks good now, uploaded. For next upload you might consider cleanup in debian/rules (eg. stop using deprecated dh_installmanpages, or completely migrate to dh). -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: slimrat
Hi
Dne Tue, 26 Jan 2010 23:14:43 -0200
Nelson A. de Oliveira nao...@gmail.com napsal(a):
Hi!
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 2:49 PM, Michal Čihař ni...@debian.org wrote:
You should use ${source:Version} for arch:all packages as these can not
be binnmued.
This is true when we are declaring a dependency of an arch:any package
to an arch:all.
But for slimrat, there are two arch:all packages only (arch:all
depending on arch:all).
In practice (and while we don't have binNMUs of arch:all packages),
the result will be the same if using ${source:Version} or
${binary:Version}, won't it?
Yes it will be. At least for now.
--
Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: mpg321 (updated package)
Hi Dne Mon, 25 Jan 2010 19:25:26 +0200 Nanakos Chrysostomos debian_...@wired-net.gr napsal(a): On 25/1/2010 16:10, Michal Čihař wrote: Your patch: ++//tempsample = mad_f_mul(*left_ch++, options.volume); ++tempsample = (mad_fixed_t) ((*left_ch++ * (double)options.volume)/MAD_F_ONE); Seems obviously wrong, because one of key features of mpg321 is that it uses just fixed-point calculation, while you introduce floating point arithmetic by this patch. Can you please tell me where mpg321 introduces floating point arithmetic, especially with this patch?? Converting to double, doing calculation in double and converting back to integer will do that. This patch sends mpg321 to the previous state. Please take a look at 0.2.10.3 , 0.2.10.6. It has nothing to do with the decoding of the mp3 file. For the audio dithering responsible are the functions from libmad which uses fixed-point calculation as you can see, audio dithering function does also. This patch will avoid compilation problems for MIPS and MIPSEL architectures [0],[1] introduced by the use of mad_f_mul function. Please take a look to /usr/include/mad.h. There is no difference by the introduced patch. Package upload again to mentors.d.n. If the bug is in mad, then please fix it there. Or at least file a bug report with appropriate severity. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: slimrat
Hi
Dne Fri, 22 Jan 2010 12:02:39 +
Paul McEnery pmcen...@gmail.com napsal(a):
The package is now source format 3.0 and lintian --pedantic clean.
- dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/slimrat/slimrat_1.0-1.dsc
Please could someone take a look and if it looks alright... upload it?
debian/clean content is wrong, please consult dh_clean(1)
do not use ${binary:Version} for arch:all packages
--
Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: parcellite (updated package)
Hi
Dne Fri, 22 Jan 2010 14:29:10 -0500
Andrew SB a.star...@gmail.com napsal(a):
I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.9.2-1
of my package parcellite.
It builds these binary packages:
parcellite - lightweight GTK+ clipboard manager
The package appears to be lintian clean.
This is a new upstream bugfix release. I've also taken the time to
updated the packaging to take advantage of the latest tools. Here is
the debian/changelog entry:
parcellite (0.9.2-1) unstable; urgency=low
.
* New upstream release. (LP: #503791)
* debian/copyright: Add new transtaltions.
* debian/{patches, rules, control}: Drop all patches,
appled upstream. Remove quilt calls and Depends.
* debian/source/format: Moved to DebSrc version 3.0 (quilt).
* debian/{control, rules, compat}:
- Move to simplified dh rules.
These are the relevant upstream changes that might interest folks:
New
+ Danish translation (by Kim Jensen).
+ Czech translation (by Miloš Koutný).
+ French translation (by Vincent Coiffier).
+ Romanian translation (by Ovidiu D. Niţan).
Changes
+ Modified action execution code.
+ Removed dependency on pthreads.
+ Clear option clears clipboard and primary contents.
+ Use accessor functions instead direct access (by Javier Jardon).
+ Add missing include statements to silence gcc warnings (by Ludwig Nussel).
+ Clipboard sync cannot be enabled unless both copy and primary are enabled.
+ Empty clipboard and primary recovery no longer overwrites contents
of other types.
+ Removes newline characters (’\n’) from the history menu entries (by
Daniel Di Marco).
The package can be found on mentors.debian.net:
- URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/parcellite
- Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable
main contrib non-free
- dget
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/parcellite/parcellite_0.9.2-1.dsc
I would be ever so glad if someone uploaded this package for me.
override_dh_installchangelogs is not needed in your case
Otherwise the package looks good and thus I've uploaded it.
Thanks
--
Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: mpg321 (updated package)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Dne Mon, 25 Jan 2010 12:17:39 +0200 Nanakos Chrysostomos nana...@wired-net.gr napsal(a): I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.2.11-2 of my package mpg321. It builds these binary packages: mpg321 - Simple and lighweight command line MP3 player The package appears to be lintian clean. The upload would fix these bugs: 566544 The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/mpg321 - - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/mpg321/mpg321_0.2.11-2.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Please do not send same email several times, it just upsets people. Comments about the package: - - there is no reason to build depend on quilt when using 3.0 (quilt) source format, you also don't need to fiddle with quilt in debian/rules - - please use DEP-3 compliant patch headers Your patch: ++//tempsample = mad_f_mul(*left_ch++, options.volume); ++tempsample = (mad_fixed_t) ((*left_ch++ * (double)options.volume)/MAD_F_ONE); Seems obviously wrong, because one of key features of mpg321 is that it uses just fixed-point calculation, while you introduce floating point arithmetic by this patch. - -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAktdpm8ACgkQ3DVS6DbnVgSJvgCfReurIJwojXYH3Lb9jRT6pZr9 4ZcAmwRhggp3yRd5GSUI3kaNwKPLE0en =58Oj -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: RFS: slimrat
Hi
Dne Mon, 25 Jan 2010 15:59:43 +
Paul McEnery pmcen...@gmail.com napsal(a):
I've also added Vcs* tags to debian/control now and you can view the
git repository here if its easier:
Browser:
http://github.com/pmcenery/slimrat-debian
Clone:
git clone http://github.com/pmcenery/slimrat-debian.git
I've also uploaded again to the mentors as usual:
dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/slimrat/slimrat_1.0-1.dsc
do not use ${binary:Version} for arch:all packages
I've not managed to fix this yet. I've read debian-policy again, and
don't seem to see any other way to depend on another package -
automatically substituting the version for the same version. Have I
missed something? Or is this something that would require the
debian/control file to be updated for every build?
You should use ${source:Version} for arch:all packages as these can not
be binnmued.
PS: no need to CC me on reply.
--
Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: parcellite (updated package)
Hi Dne Mon, 25 Jan 2010 16:44:53 -0500 Andrew SB a.star...@gmail.com napsal(a): On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 9:02 AM, Michal Čihař ni...@debian.org wrote: override_dh_installchangelogs is not needed in your case For some reason, in the past (my old rules file) dh_installchangelogs hadn't automatically found the upstream changelog. I just tested it and you're correct. Fixed in VCS for next release. This is new feature in debhelper 7, so if you used older level, it did not work this way. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: slimrat
Hi Dne Wed, 20 Jan 2010 11:01:40 + Paul McEnery pmcen...@gmail.com napsal(a): The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/slimrat - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/slimrat/slimrat_1.0-1.dsc debian/watch seems to be wrong: uscan warning: In watchfile debian/watch, reading webpage http://slimrat.googlecode.com/files/ failed: 404 Not Found You could use source format 3.0 (quilt) instead of applying patches manually. I think you should not override, use debian/clean instead. Also using debian/links for dh_links could cleanup debian/rules a bit. You should not install ChangeLog as separate docs, dh_installchangelogs installs it anyway. Please do not use own patch headers, use DEP-3 compliant headers instead. Lintian does complain: W: slimrat: manpage-has-bad-whatis-entry usr/share/man/man8/slimrat-gui.8.gz W: slimrat: manpage-has-bad-whatis-entry usr/share/man/man8/slimrat.8.gz -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: ITA of giflib
Hi Dne Wed, 13 Jan 2010 22:22:15 +0100 Thibaut GRIDEL tgri...@free.fr napsal(a): * Michal Čihař: - depend on libtool (=2.2.6) which is said not to present rpath quirks and run autoreconf to update auto-tools files from the orig You should also clean generated files, otherwise they can end up in diff if building twice in same directory. I called make maintainer-clean and removed all files modified by autoreconf. It looks nicer if you specify files to clean in debian/clean than directly in Makefile. I: giflib-tools: possible-documentation-but-no-doc-base-registration It would be good to choose one of them - either remove it or register in doc-base. There still is doc which did not turn to manpages, so I learnt doc-base. Thanks, package uploaded. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: ITA of giflib
Hi Dne Wed, 13 Jan 2010 00:43:56 +0100 Thibaut GRIDEL tgri...@free.fr napsal(a): * Michal Čihař: E: giflib-tools: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath ./usr/bin/gif2epsn /usr/lib ... for (probably) all binaries Thanks for reporting this, which I was unaware of as I build for i386. I hope to have fixed this doing the following: - depend on libtool (=2.2.6) which is said not to present rpath quirks and run autoreconf to update auto-tools files from the orig - provide --disable-rpath just in case You should also clean generated files, otherwise they can end up in diff if building twice in same directory. I: giflib-tools: possible-documentation-but-no-doc-base-registration I did not dare create a doc-base entry for what documentation is only the html version of man pages... I was considering removing the html more. It would be good to choose one of them - either remove it or register in doc-base. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: ITA of giflib
Hi Dne Tue, 12 Jan 2010 00:02:25 +0800 Paul Wise p...@debian.org napsal(a): On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 10:39 PM, Michal Čihař ni...@debian.org wrote: Also please don't write your surname in capitals, I see no reason for that. There was a short conversation about this practice on pkg-fonts-devel and planet.d.o recently: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-fonts-devel/2009-December/004094.html http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-fonts-devel/2009-December/004104.html http://planet.debian.org/cgi-bin/search.cgi?terms=capitals There are plenty of folks who already have uploaded packages to the archive with it too. I did not notice these discussions, thanks for pointing out. Anyway I most likely would not complain if it would be the only thing... -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: mpg321 (updated package)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Dne Sun, 10 Jan 2010 19:42:49 +0200 Nanakos Chrysostomos nana...@wired-net.gr napsal(a): - - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/mpg321/mpg321_0.2.11-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Help is appreciated if anything is wrong like lintian errors mentors site can't catch,locally is lintian errors and warning's free. - - debian/changelog has dos end of lines - - any reason for not using dh(1)? - - why is this needed? # clean up after mistake in 0.1.4 if [ ! -e /usr/bin/mpg123 -a ! -L /usr/bin/mpg123 ]; then ln -s /etc/alternatives/mpg123 /usr/bin/mpg123 fi - -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAktLOrwACgkQ3DVS6DbnVgRhywCfXyteToJaXhG8Q0IawRNQ0PoJ b0MAoI2tHeUxYC2u4lTjRb2CCArl5hzD =/YYU -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: RFS: ITA of giflib
Hi Dne Fri, 8 Jan 2010 21:15:58 +0100 Thibaut GRIDEL tgri...@free.fr napsal(a): I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 4.1.6-9 of orphaned package giflib. It closes ITA #543841 which I updated earlier this week-end. It builds these binary packages: giflib-dbg - library for GIF images (debug) giflib-tools - library for GIF images (utilities) libgif-dev - library for GIF images (development) libgif4- library for GIF images (library) The package appears to be lintian clean and builds which pbuilder. I: giflib source: binary-control-field-duplicates-source field section in package libgif4 E: giflib-tools: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath ./usr/bin/gif2epsn /usr/lib ... for (probably) all binaries I: giflib-tools: spelling-error-in-binary ./usr/bin/gifinfo ment meant I: giflib-tools: spelling-error-in-binary ./usr/bin/gifbg wierd weird I: giflib-tools: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/gif2epsn.1.gz:27 ... for dozens of man pages I: giflib-tools: spelling-error-in-manpage usr/share/man/man1/gifrotat.1.gz specifing specifying I: giflib-tools: possible-documentation-but-no-doc-base-registration Also please don't write your surname in capitals, I see no reason for that. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: mpg321 (updated package)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Dne Mon, 11 Jan 2010 15:50:36 +0100 Michal Čihař ni...@debian.org napsal(a): - - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/mpg321/mpg321_0.2.11-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Help is appreciated if anything is wrong like lintian errors mentors site can't catch,locally is lintian errors and warning's free. - - debian/changelog has dos end of lines - - any reason for not using dh(1)? - - why is this needed? # clean up after mistake in 0.1.4 if [ ! -e /usr/bin/mpg123 -a ! -L /usr/bin/mpg123 ]; then ln -s /etc/alternatives/mpg123 /usr/bin/mpg123 fi ...and lintian (first one comes from first thing I mentioned): E: mpg321_0.2.11-1_amd64.changes: bad-urgency-in-changes-file unknown I: mpg321 source: debian-watch-file-is-missing P: mpg321: no-upstream-changelog - -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAktLPZwACgkQ3DVS6DbnVgSgRACgwmfAerGDrXZetd/59/DF1mXg zZMAnRE2GWvj1LL+lnK9WV0/Vb2n6Z5m =vBZ3 -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: RFS: polib
Hi Dne Sun, 3 Jan 2010 06:03:13 +0100 Angel Abad angela...@gmail.com napsal(a): I am looking for a sponsor for my package polib. * Package name: polib Version : 0.5.1-1 Upstream Author : David JEAN LOUIS izimo...@gmail * URL : http://code.google.com/p/polib/ I think you should update this: Important: this page is obsolete, polib has moved to Bitbucket. * License : MIT Section : python It builds these binary packages: python-polib - Python library to parse and manage gettext catalogs The package appears to be lintian clean. The upload would fix these bugs: 535845 My motivation for maintaining this package is: because I use it in my projects. The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/polib - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/polib/polib_0.5.1-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Otherwise it looks good. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: polib
Hi Dne Sun, 3 Jan 2010 14:18:31 +0100 Angel Abad angela...@gmail.com napsal(a): I fix the homepage and update watch file, the new package is in mentors. Thanks, package uploaded. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: ocropus (updated package, 2nd try)
Hi Dne Wed, 2 Dec 2009 21:51:52 +0100 Jakub Wilk uba...@users.sf.net napsal(a): * Michal Čihař ni...@debian.org, 2009-11-30, 13:39: Possibly this exact version is not needed. I was just following this part of /usr/share/doc/autotools-dev/README.Debian.gz: For automake 1.6 and above, and newest autoconf: [...] - Call the automake suite using *versioned* names (automake-1.9, etc), OR use autoreconf, but set the environment variables accordingly to the versioned names. Otherwise, you may get a higher version than what you expected. If you know your Makefile.am files are very well behaved, and will not break with a newer automake, versioned names are optional. Upstream is apparently using 1.9.6 so I thought it was the safest choice to hardcode automake-1.9. Okay, I usually assume the Makefile.am is not that broken so it won't work in next version and use current automake. If you insist, I can convert the package to use current automake. I really do not insist in this, rather I currently don't have time to look at the package deeper. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: ITA of giflib
Hi Dne Mon, 30 Nov 2009 20:01:53 +0100 Thibaut GRIDEL tgri...@free.fr napsal(a): Michal ?iha? ni...@debian.org wrote: dget: removing giflib_4.1.6.orig.tar.gz (md5sum does not match) I guess that is part of some log when you were trying to upload ?? (Just curious how how could have find that one myself if not getting beaten by the different md5 problem). Well I first download sources from the archive and then I tried dget the source you posted and dget complains if tarball has different md5. PS: Ne need to CC me. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: ITA of giflib
Hi Dne Sun, 29 Nov 2009 23:42:08 +0100 Thibaut GRIDEL tgri...@free.fr napsal(a): To improve my packaging experience, I also set up packaging with git this week-end on alioth.debian.org: http://git.debian.org/?p=collab-maint/giflib.git;a=summary You seem to miss pristine-tar in your setup here... The upload would fix these bugs: 453530, 543841 The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/giflib - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/giflib/giflib_4.1.6-9.dsc ...and it is the reason why your tarball differs from the one in the archive: dget: removing giflib_4.1.6.orig.tar.gz (md5sum does not match) -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: ocropus (updated package, 2nd try)
Hi Dne Sun, 29 Nov 2009 22:44:24 +0100 Jakub Wilk uba...@users.sf.net napsal(a): I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.3.1-1 of package ocropus, which I intend to co-maintain with Jeffrey Ratcliffe. It builds these binary packages: ocropus - document analysis and OCR system ocropus-data - document analysis and OCR system --- data files The package appears to be lintian clean (except possible misspelling in binaries, which I am not going to address in this release). The upload would fix these bugs: 518772, 551167, 551174 The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/o/ocropus/ocropus_0.3.1-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. What is the reason for running autoreconf in clean? Why you don't package latest upstream version? It's already several months old. Also does Jeffrey know about this upload? -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: ocropus (updated package, 2nd try)
Dne Mon, 30 Nov 2009 11:48:17 +0100 Jakub Wilk uba...@users.sf.net napsal(a): * Michal Čihař ni...@debian.org, 2009-11-30, 09:47: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/o/ocropus/ocropus_0.3.1-1.dsc What is the reason for running autoreconf in clean? Upstream build system is horribly broken. That was the easiest way to sanitize it. (The autoreconf line may look purposeless, but with it the package FTBFS.) Well I ran into this wile running build in pbuilder, but it runs clean on the local system, where I don't have automake1.9. Do you really need this exact version? -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: ocropus (updated package, 2nd try)
Hi Dne Mon, 30 Nov 2009 13:30:22 +0100 Jakub Wilk uba...@users.sf.net napsal(a): Possibly this exact version is not needed. I was just following this part of /usr/share/doc/autotools-dev/README.Debian.gz: For automake 1.6 and above, and newest autoconf: [...] - Call the automake suite using *versioned* names (automake-1.9, etc), OR use autoreconf, but set the environment variables accordingly to the versioned names. Otherwise, you may get a higher version than what you expected. If you know your Makefile.am files are very well behaved, and will not break with a newer automake, versioned names are optional. Upstream is apparently using 1.9.6 so I thought it was the safest choice to hardcode automake-1.9. Okay, I usually assume the Makefile.am is not that broken so it won't work in next version and use current automake. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: xz-utils (updated package)
Hi Dne Sun, 4 Oct 2009 01:34:59 -0500 Jonathan Nieder jrnie...@gmail.com napsal(a): Dear mentors, I am looking for feedback and a possible sponsor for the new version 4.999.9beta+20091002-1 of my package xz-utils. It builds these binary packages: xz-utils - high compression-ratio compressor liblzma-dev - development library liblzma-doc - doxygen-generated reference documentation liblzma0 - runtime library The package appears to be lintian clean. The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/x/xz-utils - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/x/xz-utils/xz-utils_4.999.9beta+20091002-1.dsc This addresses several serious bugs, including 542060, which made the previous version impossible to install with apt-get, and 544872, which could cause the ostensibly lossless compression to lose a few trailing bytes in some circumstances. So naturally, I would be very happy if someone finds the time to look this over. Uploaded. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: python-keyring
Hi Dne Wed, 02 Sep 2009 22:56:21 +0200 Carl Chenet cha...@ohmytux.com napsal(a): Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package python-keyring. * Package name: python-keyring Version : 0.1+hg66-1 Is it really necessary to package some vcs snapshot? Otherwise the package looks good. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: gtklp (updated package)
Hi Dne Fri, 28 Aug 2009 11:08:43 +0800 Zak B. Elep zak...@zakame.net napsal(a): On Tue, 2009-08-25 at 22:48 +0800, Zak B. Elep wrote: Note that I'm not closing the door on separating patches as files altogether; I may go back to simple-patchsys style when I have more than a handful of patches to keep. And go back, I did. ;) Thanks :-). I've updated my gtklp to 1.2.7-2, here's the changelog: gtklp (1.2.7-2) unstable; urgency=low * Use TopGit and Quilt to manage patches * Re-add debian/patches, autogenerated from git branches * debian/rules: call autogen.sh after applying patches dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/gtklp/gtklp_1.2.7-2.dsc Uploaded. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Bug#543843: gqview -- simple image viewer using GTK+
Hi Dne Thu, 27 Aug 2009 11:48:57 +0200 martin f krafft madd...@debian.org napsal(a): also sprach Daniel Baumann dan...@debian.org [2009.08.27.0944 +0200]: I am orphaning gqview. Maintaining a package requires time and skills. Please only adopt this package if you will have enough time and attention to work on it. I'd be willing to sponsor anyone who will take up maintenance of this package. Please note that there is geeqie, which took gqview code and now provides active upstream for it. There is also pending patch for geeqie package to provide gqview, which we will integrate once geeqie will get out of beta phase. And then it will be time to drop gqview package. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: gtklp (updated package)
Hi Dne Tue, 25 Aug 2009 15:16:29 +0800 Zak B. Elep zak...@zakame.net napsal(a): I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 1.2.7-1 of my package gtklp. I've updated this package mainly to have it rebuild autotools stuff at build-time now (as documented in autotools-dev,) and fix a few bugs. The package is available at the mentors repository: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/gtklp - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/gtklp/gtklp_1.2.7-1.dsc and can also be found now at my git, http://code.zakame.net/gtklp.git. I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. I also look forward to your comments or suggestions! Have you considered using patch system instead of directly patching? Otherwise the package looks good (ignoring fact that I don't like CDBS). -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: gtklp (updated package)
Hi Dne Tue, 25 Aug 2009 16:13:27 +0800 Zak B. Elep zak...@zakame.net napsal(a): On Tue, 2009-08-25 at 09:34 +0200, Michal Čihař wrote: Have you considered using patch system instead of directly patching? Otherwise the package looks good (ignoring fact that I don't like CDBS). I was using CDBS' simple-patchsys to maintain a patch system, but have now decided to track those changes inside git branches instead. But it is better to have separate patches in the package so that you can see purpose of each change just from the source package without need to investigate whatever version control does author use. Maybe there is some way to generate patches from git branches automatically? -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Package uploaded with UNRELEASED distribution.
Hi Dne Thu, 20 Aug 2009 14:24:40 -0700 Russ Allbery r...@debian.org napsal(a): We had a specific request for Lintian to not warn about UNRELEASED as the distribution so that people could run it on each build and know that any output meant a problem. Unfortunately, that creates the possibility for something like this to happen, since dput and dupload only look at the *.changes file and don't care about what's in the changelog, and Lintian's architecture makes it very hard for it to see a mismatch between the *.changes file and the package. Well for this case it would be enough to catch mismatch in changes which did contain untable as distribution, but UNRELEASED in the changes entry. Not sure how useful such check would be though. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Requests to sponsor new library packages
Hi Dne Wed, 19 Aug 2009 23:42:38 +1000 Ben Finney ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au napsal(a): I obviously wasn't clear on this point: The library package is prepared *first*, to provide functionality needed by the dependent package. They're not ready for sponsorship together. What advice then? In my case, ‘fooapp’ needs ‘libbar’, which in turn needs ‘libbaz’. So, with only a limited amount of time, I work first on ‘libbaz’, and that package is ready for sponsorship before the others. Should I wait until all three are done — an indeterminate amount of time — before making an RFS for the ready-to-inspect ‘libbaz’? But you need to have some test that library package is okay. For example that you did not miss some header, pkgconfig file or whatever. And you can do this only if you have some program using the library. I don't think it should be that major problem to provide all dependent packages at once for review. At least people I sponsor did not have a problem with this approach. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: libsockets++
Hi Dne Wed, 19 Aug 2009 04:44:18 + Leinier Cruz Salfran salfra...@ipigto.rimed.cu napsal(a): El mar, 18-08-2009 a las 23:30 +0200, Michal Čihař escribió: Dne Tue, 18 Aug 2009 01:44:08 + Just quick review: - you add change license stuff in debian diff without any explanation I made one change in the license (debian/copyright): the openssl library exception did I made something wrong? i followed [1] But it is the author of the code who can add the exception, not you as the packager. - debian/rules contains lot of commented out things, it looks like this package is ideal candidate for minimal dh based debian/rules I commented the lines that I do not use for package construct, for example: # dh_installmenu # dh_installdebconf # dh_installlogrotate # dh_installemacsen # dh_installpam # dh_installmime # dh_installinit # dh_installcron # dh_installinfo # dh_installman should I remove it? Yes, please remove things you do not use. Or just use minimal dh based debian/rules (/usr/share/doc/debhelper/examples/rules.tiny), which seem to perfectly fit your case. - how did you choose soname for the library? what if upstream decides for different numbering later? I am in contact with the author So the upstream will adapt your numbering? - lintian -I --pendantic: I: libsockets++ source: debian-watch-file-is-missing this is required? No, but highly recommended. I: libsockets++ source: binary-control-field-duplicates-source field section in package libsockets++2 i used 'dh_make' to contruct 'debian' directory then I modified what I needed You have specified same section for source package and for one binary, it is not needed. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: why?
Hi Dne Tue, 18 Aug 2009 01:46:04 + Leinier Cruz Salfran salfra...@ipigto.rimed.cu napsal(a): why is so hard to find a sponsor? I have a package online since 2 weeks ago, I sent 3 RFS and I have found no sponsor yet. why People are busy :-). Lot of DD's have been on DebConf, taking some vacation around it and now we try to keep up with piles of emails that ended up in our mailboxes. And if the package does not look enough attractive, you need to be patient. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: libsockets++
Hi Dne Tue, 18 Aug 2009 01:44:08 + Leinier Cruz Salfran salfra...@ipigto.rimed.cu napsal(a): The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/libsockets++ - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/libsockets++/libsockets++_2.3.5-2.dsc Just quick review: - you add change license stuff in debian diff without any explanation - debian/rules contains lot of commented out things, it looks like this package is ideal candidate for minimal dh based debian/rules - please use patch system instead of directly patching sources - how did you choose soname for the library? what if upstream decides for different numbering later? - lintian -I --pendantic: I: libsockets++ source: debian-watch-file-is-missing I: libsockets++ source: binary-control-field-duplicates-source field section in package libsockets++2 P: libsockets++ source: direct-changes-in-diff-but-no-patch-system Ajp13Socket.cpp and 117 more -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: about debian/watch
Hi Dne Sat, 15 Aug 2009 12:43:03 +0530 Kartik Mistry kartik.mis...@gmail.com napsal(a): On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 12:37 PM, Elías A. M.eal...@gmail.com wrote: How I can put in debian/watch this path..? http://downloads.sourceforge.net/project/app/app/1.10/app-1.10.zip Try: man uscan and see: qa.debian.org redirector description there.. What is actually the way to make it work with new release system on sf.net? I can construct watch file, which would find current version: http://sf.net/phpmyadmin/phpMyAdmin/3.2.1/phpMyAdmin-([0-9.]*(?:-pl[0-9]*)?)-all-languages\.tar\.gz But that does not seem much usable ;-). -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: vera++ on debian git: collab maint
Hi Dne Thu, 6 Aug 2009 17:04:11 +0200 Mathieu Malaterre mathieu.malate...@gmail.com napsal(a): Just out of curiosity, is this normal if I do not see the collab-maint/vera++ from my firefox on http://git.debian.org. It usually takes some time till the listing refreshes. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: cdash
Hi Thanks for packaging cdash, I use it for quite some time, but haven't found time to package it. Dne Thu, 30 Jul 2009 16:25:26 +0200 (CEST) mathieu.malate...@gmail.com napsal(a): The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/cdash - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/cdash/cdash_1.4.2-1.dsc Let's start with lintian check: W: cdash source: binary-arch-rules-but-pkg-is-arch-indep W: cdash source: changelog-should-mention-nmu W: cdash source: source-nmu-has-incorrect-version-number 1.4.2-1 W: cdash source: maintainer-also-in-uploaders Other things: - you miss DEBHELPER token in postinst - drop useless commented lines from debian/rules and debian/watch - you might want to use dh to simplify debian/rules - it would be great to create database during installation using dbconfig-common - there is no need to depend on apache, any webserver with PHP support will work - why do you depend on libapache2-mod-auth-mysql? -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: cdash
Hi Dne Thu, 30 Jul 2009 17:53:32 +0200 (CEST) Mathieu Malaterre mathieu.malate...@gmail.com napsal(a): On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 5:11 PM, Michal Čihařni...@debian.org wrote: Thanks for packaging cdash, I use it for quite some time, but haven't found time to package it. You seems to be a DD, I guess you should have write access to the git rep: http://git.debian.org/?p=collab-maint/cdash.git;a=summary I am not sure I fully grasp the notion of collab-maint, but I guess you could just patch directly there. I probably could, but I don't want to maintain another package :-). Let's start with lintian check: W: cdash source: binary-arch-rules-but-pkg-is-arch-indep I still do not understand how to use dh_make I guess. I rename binary-arch to binary-indep. Thx. W: cdash source: changelog-should-mention-nmu W: cdash source: source-nmu-has-incorrect-version-number 1.4.2-1 Reading the lintian report, it seems it is ok as long as the version *exactly* match the official one. The problem is that you have different name in debian/changelog and debian/control. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: how to fix dpkg-gensymbols difference on (arch)
Hi Dne Wed, 24 Jun 2009 23:32:37 +0900 Hideki Yamane henr...@debian.or.jp napsal(a): I want to fix FTBFS: dpkg-gensymbols difference on alpha http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=519819 The easiest way is remove debian/libchasen2.symbols but I think there may be more better solution. So, how do I deal with this? Provide per architecture symbol files for symbols which differ, for example I did this recently with rpm http://git.debian.org/?p=collab-maint/rpm.git. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: claws-mail-debian-spam-plugin
Hi Dne Tue, 2 Jun 2009 16:30:38 +0200 David Paleino d.pale...@gmail.com napsal(a): In DEP-5 I clearly see: License * [..] * First line: licence name(s) in abbreviated format (see Short names section). If empty, it is given the default value ‘other’ * Remaining lines: either copy the full text of the license(s), indicate a link to it (or them), or leave this part empty for using standalone License section(s) that matches the license short name(s) (see the Standalone License Section section). I'm leaving those remaining lines empty, in favour of standalone license section. And there's no example on how to point to files in /u/s/common-licenses/ in a standalone section. However, if this is a blocker for sponsoring, I'll happily change my debian/copyright. :) No it's not blocker, uploaded. It's just a matter of establishing a format, and I'm pretty sure ftpmasters wouldn't bother whether I add a X-Comment or not ;) Hopefully no. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: claws-mail-debian-spam-plugin
Hi Dne Mon, 1 Jun 2009 12:34:10 +0200 David Paleino d.pale...@gmail.com napsal(a): X-Comment: on Debian systems, the complete text of the GNU General Public License version 3 can be found in `/usr/share/common-licenses/GPL-3', while the latest version can be found in `/usr/share/common-licenses/GPL'. That whole paragraph is right. Since the code is GPL-3+, I'm both pointing to the minimum version (GPL-3) and the latest (+, GPL) -- they just happen to be the same at this time. For second (pedantic) warning, why did you use X-Comment field? To point to copies of licenses in /usr/share/common-licenses/, without violating the RFC. Neither DEP-5 nor the wiki page seems to mention this field. DEP-5: Extra fields. Extra fields can be added to any section. Their name starts by X-. But this does not explain why do you use extra field. All examples in DEP-5 have link to license in License field. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: claws-mail-debian-spam-plugin
Hi Dne Sat, 30 May 2009 18:41:12 +0200 David Paleino d.pale...@gmail.com napsal(a): The package is lintian clean (just debian-watch-file-is-missing, but since I don't have a homepage yet...) The package can be found on Alioth: http://alioth.debian.org/~hanska-guest/apt/unstable/claws-mail-debian-spam-plugin_0.0.1-1.dsc Few comments: - please remove commented out parts of debian/rules - debian/dirs and debian/install seem to be extra (make install works, so why you install things manually?) - debian/copyright misses link to format specification - lintian slightly complains, but as you have no homepage, it is not fixable: I: claws-mail-debian-spam-plugin source: debian-watch-file-is-missing P: claws-mail-debian-spam-plugin: copyright-refers-to-symlink-license usr/share/common-licenses/GPL P: claws-mail-debian-spam-plugin: no-homepage-field For second (pedantic) warning, why did you use X-Comment field? Neither DEP-5 nor the wiki page seems to mention this field. Once you will address these, I can upload it. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: cconv -- A iconv based simplified-traditional chinese conversion tool
Hi Dne Tue, 12 May 2009 23:26:40 +0800 Vern Sun s5u...@gmail.com napsal(a): on 二, 2009-05-12 at 17:02 +0800, Michal Čihař wrote: - you should split the library to libcconv0 and rename devel package to libcconv-dev - please write useful description, pointing user to url is not a useful description done - cconv man page is obviously generated, you should include it's sources and generate it during build I use asciidoc to generate manpage, fixed. - Vcs-* fields are for debian packaging not for upstream - README.Debian is useless - why do you install empty file NEWS? clear Reuploaded. The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/cconv - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/cconv/cconv_0.5.2-1.dsc There are still some things: - static library and libtool script should go to devel package (*.la, *.a) - are all those versioned build depends really needed? - I don't think that iconv based is important information which should be as first in short description. Either remove it completely or move it to the end. - there is no need for creating postinst for library package - lintian --pendantic: P: libcconv0: copyright-refers-to-symlink-license usr/share/common-licenses/GPL P: cconv: copyright-refers-to-symlink-license usr/share/common-licenses/GPL P: libcconv-dev: copyright-refers-to-symlink-license usr/share/common-licenses/GPL -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: cconv -- A iconv based simplified-traditional chinese conversion tool
Hi Dne Thu, 14 May 2009 19:19:19 +0800 Vern Sun s5u...@gmail.com napsal(a): on 四, 2009-05-14 at 18:11 +0800, Michal Čihař wrote: - are all those versioned build depends really needed? as you said cconv man page is obviously generated, you should include it's sources and generate it during build. most of the depends are used for generate man page. I'm talking about versions, not about dependencies. - there is no need for creating postinst for library package the problem is lintian show error if I deleted the postinst: E: libcconv0: postinst-must-call-ldconfig usr/lib/libcconv.so.0.0.0 N: N:The package installs shared libraries in a directory controlled by the N:dynamic library loader. Therefore, the package must call ldconfig in N:its postinst script. N: N:Refer to Debian Policy Manual section 8.1.1 (ldconfig) for details. N: N:Severity: serious, Certainty: certain please tell me what I am doing wrong. thanks. You miss call to dh_makeshlibs. Consider switching to dh, which will do all jobs for you. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: cconv -- A iconv based simplified-traditional chinese conversion tool
Hi Dne Thu, 14 May 2009 21:09:03 +0800 Vern Sun s5u...@gmail.com napsal(a): reuploaded. the package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/cconv/cconv_0.5.2-1.dsc Uploaded, thanks. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: cconv -- A iconv based simplified-traditional chinese conversion tool
Hi Dne Tue, 12 May 2009 16:21:32 +0800 Vern Sun s5u...@gmail.com napsal(a): The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/cconv - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/cconv/cconv_0.5.2-1.dsc - you might want to use debhelper 7 features (dh) to simplify debian/rules, your package seems to be good candidate to this - lintian slightly complains: P: cconv-dev: copyright-refers-to-symlink-license usr/share/common-licenses/GPL P: cconv: copyright-refers-to-symlink-license usr/share/common-licenses/GPL I: cconv: extended-description-is-probably-too-short - any reason why library is placed in /usr/lib/cconv? - you should split the library to libcconv0 and rename devel package to libcconv-dev - please write useful description, pointing user to url is not a useful description - you need to list all copyrights and licenses in debian/copyright - Vcs-* fields are for debian packaging not for upstream - -dev package is not a metapackage - cconv man page is obviously generated, you should include it's sources and generate it during build - README.Debian is useless - why do you install empty file NEWS? -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: scmbug
Hi Dne Sun, 10 May 2009 14:34:53 -0700 Kristis Makris kristis.mak...@asu.edu napsal(a): Could you please help in trying to resolve this issues with packaging scmbug ? On Mon, 2009-01-26 at 19:16 +0100, Michal Čihař wrote: I am looking for a sponsor for my package scmbug. * Package name: scmbug Version : 0.26.13 Upstream Author : Kristis Makris kristis.mak...@asu.edu * URL : http://www.mkgnu.net/?q=scmbug * License : GPL Section : devel It builds these binary packages: scmbug-common - Scmbug common libraries. scmbug-doc - Scmbug documentation. scmbug-server - Scmbug integration server. scmbug-tools - Scmbug integration tools. The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/scmbug - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/scmbug/scmbug_0.26.13.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Very quick look at the package: 1. Do not make package native. What do I need to do to change the package into being non-native ? How/where do I specify the non-native version number ? 2. Please create proper debian directory and not by symlink to some directory with templates and other crap in it. Why not ? Because it breaks some tools which check archive and makes NMUs needlessly complicated. Debian is not the only distribution this system is packaged for. I don't like to have a top-level directory called debian in the source code repository. Instead, I have a directory called packaging/debian. There is no need to have debian packaging things in upstream. 4. Build fails as there are some hardcoded paths: make: Entering an unknown directory make: *** /home/mkgnu/devel/scmbug.0.26.13/SCMBUG_RELEASE_0-26-13/src/tests: No such file or directory. Stop. make: Leaving an unknown directory make[1]: *** [clean] Error 2 Full log is at http://tmp.cihar.com/scmbug_0.26.13_amd64.build There are no hardcoded paths in the build process. I'm not sure why this error occurs. Have you looked at Makefile in your package? It contains this path on dozens of lines. This link is no longer valid. Yes, it is valid for month, I don't keep such things forever. To reproduce it run fakeroot debian/rules clean on your sources. 6. Please use litian: $ lintian -IE --pedantic scmbug_0.26.13.dsc W: scmbug source: ancient-standards-version 3.5.2 (current is 3.8.0) I: scmbug source: build-depends-without-arch-dep docbook-dsssl I: scmbug source: build-depends-without-arch-dep docbook-utils I: scmbug source: build-depends-without-arch-dep transfig I: scmbug source: build-depends-without-arch-dep imagemagick W: scmbug source: configure-generated-file-in-source config.log W: scmbug source: configure-generated-file-in-source config.status Is it necessary that I correct warnings ? For most sponsors this is required, unless you have good reason to keep them (= it is a lintian bug or you add override with proper reasoning). 7. Source should match the one available on upstream website: $ md5sum SCMBUG_RELEASE_0-26-13.tar.gz scmbug_0.26.13.tar.gz a5c92c23e8c2fa5f67a389e12c04aacd SCMBUG_RELEASE_0-26-13.tar.gz d5645be5bc4a620f8f9db67a11662f0b scmbug_0.26.13.tar.gz I don't understand how dpkg-buildpackage prepared this new .tar.gz file. You should not make native package. Then tarball would match the original one and all packaging changes will be in separate file. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: scid (updated package)
Hi Dne Mon, 27 Apr 2009 14:25:00 +0200 (CEST) W. van den Akker list...@wilsoft.nl napsal(a): I have contacted the previous maintainer (see also #487771). He agreed that I may continue maintaining the package for Debian. Since the previous upload (aug-08) I have made massive changes in the build proces after some feedback from (Sandro Tosi). One thing I cannot resolve. I cant get in my full name because the key is not known then :( How about adding new uid? Comments on package (I just did quick look, not full review): Following files seems to be useless: debian/scid-doc.docs debian/scid2-doc.install Watch file fails: http://scid.sourceforge.net/download/ failed: 403 Forbidden -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: mpg321 (updated package)
Hi Dne Sun, 19 Apr 2009 19:07:30 -0500 Elías A. M. eal...@gmail.com napsal(a): I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.2.10.7 of my package mpg321. It builds these binary packages: mpg321 - mpg123 clone that doesn't use floating point The package appears to be lintian clean. It does not appear: W: mpg321 source: out-of-date-standards-version 3.8.0 (current is 3.8.1) I: mpg321 source: quilt-patch-missing-description 01_fix_man.patch I: mpg321 source: quilt-patch-missing-description 02_mpeg_version.patch P: mpg321: copyright-refers-to-symlink-license usr/share/common-licenses/GPL And why do you add patches to native package? -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: easytag (updated package)
Hi Dne Sun, 19 Apr 2009 23:49:35 +0200 Benjamin Drung benjamin.dr...@gmail.com napsal(a): I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 2.1.6-0.1 of my package easytag. If you want to upload new version, you should get in touch with current maintainer. Also you should not close bugs where you are not maintainer and don't have good reason to do so (I'm talking about NMU bug, I did not check if you did this also to other bugs). Anyway if you want to take care of easytag, get in touch with current maintainer who seems to really miss time to maintain this package and maybe he will give the package maintainership to you. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: mpg321 (updated package)
Hi Dne Mon, 20 Apr 2009 18:11:15 +1000 Ben Finney ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au napsal(a): Michal Čihař ni...@debian.org writes: Elías A. M. eal...@gmail.com napsal(a): I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.2.10.7 of my package mpg321. […] And why do you add patches to native package? More directly: Why is this package given a Debian-native version when it's clearly not specific to Debian systems? It did have it since ever, because Debian was upstream here. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: mpg321 (updated package)
Hi Dne Mon, 20 Apr 2009 19:46:56 +1000 Ben Finney ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au napsal(a): Michal Čihař ni...@debian.org writes: Ben Finney ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au napsal(a): More directly: Why is this package given a Debian-native version when it's clearly not specific to Debian systems? It did have it since ever, because Debian was upstream here. As pointed out in the FAQ entry I quoted, “a Debian developer is upstream” is not a good reason to make a package Debian-native. I should have added that I know that it is not good reason. I was just explaining that it is not something what he had changed, but rather a thing which is there since the package has been in Debian. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: mpg321 (updated package)
Hi Dne Mon, 20 Apr 2009 19:13:49 +0900 Charles Plessy ple...@debian.org napsal(a): it should probably be trivial to convert mpg321 to the non-native format, but is this program still needed now that mpg123 is free? AFAIK there is still important difference that mpg321 does not need FPU. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: inotify-tools (adopted and updated package)
Dne Fri, 10 Apr 2009 12:31:25 -0700 Ryan Niebur ryanrya...@gmail.com napsal(a): Hi, On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 10:21:00AM +0200, Michal Čihař wrote: Please describe in more details fixed bugs in changelog, New Upstream Version (Closes: #494782, #458132, #520672) does not really get idea what got fixed. Changed to: * New Upstream Version (Closes: #494782) - fixes outputting time strings (Closes: #458132) - patch for inotifytools_next_events blocking if timeout is 0 apparently applied upstream (Closes: #520672) and reuploaded to mentors. Uploaded. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: devtodo (updated package)
Hi Dne Thu, 9 Apr 2009 23:08:37 -0700 Ryan Niebur ryanrya...@gmail.com napsal(a): I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.1.20-5 of my package devtodo. It builds these binary packages: devtodo- hierarchical, prioritised todo list manager The package appears to be lintian clean. The upload would fix these bugs: 470705, 483976, 516604 The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/d/devtodo - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/d/devtodo/devtodo_0.1.20-5.dsc Uploaded. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: inotify-tools (adopted and updated package)
Hi Dne Thu, 9 Apr 2009 23:08:07 -0700 Ryan Niebur ryanrya...@gmail.com napsal(a): I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 3.13-1 of my package inotify-tools. It builds these binary packages: inotify-tools - command-line programs providing a simple interface to inotify libinotifytools0 - utility wrapper around inotify libinotifytools0-dev - Development library and header files for libinotifytools0 The package appears to be lintian clean. The upload would fix these bugs: 458132, 464829, 494782, 518267, 520672 Please describe in more details fixed bugs in changelog, New Upstream Version (Closes: #494782, #458132, #520672) does not really get idea what got fixed. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: lynis (updated package)
Hi Dne Fri, 10 Apr 2009 09:40:37 +0200 Francisco M. García Claramonte fgclaramo...@yahoo.es napsal(a): The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/lynis - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/lynis/lynis_1.2.6-1.dsc Uploaded. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: docutils-writer-manpage 0.1~svn.r5690-1
Hi Dne Wed, 08 Apr 2009 13:50:49 +1000 Ben Finney ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au napsal(a): Ben Finney ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au writes: The package is Lintian clean. … though it does have ‘extended-description-is-probably-too-short’. Please let me know if that's a problem, otherwise I'll simply override it in a future release. How about writing better description instead of adding override? -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: hexer (adopted updated package)
Hi Dne Fri, 3 Apr 2009 05:50:09 +0300 Peter Pentchev r...@ringlet.net napsal(a): I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.1.4c-3 of my package hexer. This is an adoption - ITA #520635. The changelog entry describing my update to the Debian packaging of hexer is included a bit further down. There's just one binary package: hexer - An interactive binary editor with a Vi-like interface Have you checked how does it compare to bvi? The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/h/hexer/hexer_0.1.4c-3.dsc Besides two overrides, which were already brought to attention, I don't see anything problematic in there. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: mpview
Hi Dne Fri, 27 Mar 2009 20:42:02 +0100 Adam Ziaja azi...@gmail.com napsal(a): I made this Build-Depends with script from http://www.debian.org/doc/maint-guide/ch-dreq.en.html Here's a hack you can use to find out which packages your package needs to be built Yes, the word hack is there intentionally. Please read relevant policy section: http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-source.html#s-pkg-relations And you did not reply to following question: Do you have any signs that upstream is still alive? It looks like a bit dead project from quick look. PS: No need to CC me on replies. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: mpview
Hi Dne Thu, 26 Mar 2009 15:21:29 +0100 Adam Ziaja a...@ziaja.name napsal(a): I am looking for a sponsor for my package mpview. Package name: mpview Version : 0.4.1-1 Upstream Author : Martin Petricek mar...@petricek.net URL : http://mpview.sourceforge.net License : GPL Section : graphics It builds these binary packages: mpview - MP View is cross-platform image viewer with possibility of image manipulation Do you have any signs that upstream is still alive? It looks like a bit dead project from quick look. The package appears to be lintian clean. It does not: I: mpview source: debian-watch-file-is-missing W: mpview source: dh-clean-k-is-deprecated W: mpview source: out-of-date-standards-version 3.7.3 (current is 3.8.1) There is at least one file (./src/cimg/CImg.h) which does not seem to be GPL. Build-Depends are insane, please list only things you actually need and do not list build essentials. Also debian/rules should be much cleaner, to me it looks like using one of minimal dh examples should be enough, see dh(1). -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: uncrustify (updated package)
Hi Dne Thu, 19 Feb 2009 02:07:13 +0100 Johann Rudloff cyph...@gmx.net napsal(a): The package appears to be lintian clean. It does not appear so for me: $ lintian -IE --pendantic uncrustify_0.51-1_amd64.changes P: uncrustify source: direct-changes-in-diff-but-no-patch-system config.log W: uncrustify source: configure-generated-file-in-source config.log I: uncrustify: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/uncrustify.1.gz:12 I: uncrustify: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/uncrustify.1.gz:14 I: uncrustify: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/uncrustify.1.gz:19 I: uncrustify: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/uncrustify.1.gz:20 I: uncrustify: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/uncrustify.1.gz:44 I: uncrustify: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/uncrustify.1.gz:102 I: uncrustify: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/uncrustify.1.gz:122 I: uncrustify: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/uncrustify.1.gz:125 I: uncrustify: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/uncrustify.1.gz:128 I: uncrustify: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/uncrustify.1.gz:130 I: uncrustify: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/uncrustify.1.gz 1 more occurrences not shown W: uncrustify: copyright-refers-to-versionless-license-file usr/share/common-licenses/GPL I: uncrustify: copyright-with-old-dh-make-debian-copyright P: uncrustify: no-upstream-changelog -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: What to do if the original tarball contains a debian subdirectory
Hi Dne Wed, 28 Jan 2009 15:59:03 + (BST) Dmitrijs Ledkovs dmitrij.led...@gmail.com napsal(a): I have a similar question. Upstream has file ./debian/files in their tarball. Lintian complained about that file so I've deleted it. But during build in pbuilder it gets added back from the orig tarball. How to handle this? Probably safest way is to repackage the tarball without debian directory and ask upstream to change this practice in next versions. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: scmbug
Hi Dne Mon, 26 Jan 2009 11:00:52 -0700 Kristis Makris kristis.mak...@asu.edu napsal(a): I am looking for a sponsor for my package scmbug. * Package name: scmbug Version : 0.26.13 Upstream Author : Kristis Makris kristis.mak...@asu.edu * URL : http://www.mkgnu.net/?q=scmbug * License : GPL Section : devel It builds these binary packages: scmbug-common - Scmbug common libraries. scmbug-doc - Scmbug documentation. scmbug-server - Scmbug integration server. scmbug-tools - Scmbug integration tools. The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/scmbug - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/scmbug/scmbug_0.26.13.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Very quick look at the package: 1. Do not make package native. 2. Please create proper debian directory and not by symlink to some directory with templates and other crap in it. 3. Please file an ITP bug and close it in first changelog entry. 4. Build fails as there are some hardcoded paths: make: Entering an unknown directory make: *** /home/mkgnu/devel/scmbug.0.26.13/SCMBUG_RELEASE_0-26-13/src/tests: No such file or directory. Stop. make: Leaving an unknown directory make[1]: *** [clean] Error 2 Full log is at http://tmp.cihar.com/scmbug_0.26.13_amd64.build 5. Please be more verbose in description of package. 6. Please use litian: $ lintian -IE --pedantic scmbug_0.26.13.dsc W: scmbug source: ancient-standards-version 3.5.2 (current is 3.8.0) I: scmbug source: build-depends-without-arch-dep docbook-dsssl I: scmbug source: build-depends-without-arch-dep docbook-utils I: scmbug source: build-depends-without-arch-dep transfig I: scmbug source: build-depends-without-arch-dep imagemagick W: scmbug source: configure-generated-file-in-source config.log W: scmbug source: configure-generated-file-in-source config.status 7. Source should match the one available on upstream website: $ md5sum SCMBUG_RELEASE_0-26-13.tar.gz scmbug_0.26.13.tar.gz a5c92c23e8c2fa5f67a389e12c04aacd SCMBUG_RELEASE_0-26-13.tar.gz d5645be5bc4a620f8f9db67a11662f0b scmbug_0.26.13.tar.gz -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
