Bug#1067930: RFS: python-keep/2.10.1-1 [ITP] -- Personal shell command keeper and snippets manager
Hi Chris, thanks for taking a look at my package. On 27/08/24 22:45, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote: | Section: python Why? That keep is implemented in python is an implementation detail. Why not "shells" or "education" or even "utils" instead? That makes sense, I will change it to an appropriate section. | Source: python-keep I felt 'keep' was a bit too generic a name for the package. moreover, several other python packages in Debian seemed to be doing the same (for instance https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/python-raccoon from https://github.com/rsheftel/raccoon) Would it be better if I kept the original name? Best Regards, Shriram Ravindranathan OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#1067930: RFS: python-keep/2.10.1-1 [ITP] -- Personal shell command keeper and snippets manager
Dear Phil, Thank you so much for taking the time to review my package. I have updated the standards-version and the VCS fields. Please find the updated package here <https://salsa.debian.org/s20n/python-keep> and here <https://mentors.debian.net/package/python-keep/> Regards, Shriram Ravindranathan On 06/08/24 17:35, Phil Wyett wrote: Control: tags -1 +moreinfo On Mon, 1 Apr 2024 20:48:02 +0530 Shriram Ravindranathan wrote: Dear Mentors, This package "python-keep" is a dependency of the new upstream version of another package that I am adopting called "howdoi" <https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/howdoi> Neither of these packages have salsa repositories under the debian group yet. Could you please create these two repositories for me? Thanking you, -- Shriram Ravindranathan Shriram, I am going to do a full review as this package has languished. Preamble... Thank you for taking the time to prepare this package and your contribution to the Debian project. The review below is for assistance. This review is offered to help package submitters to Debian mentors inorder to improve their packages prior to possible sponsorship into Debian. There is no obligation on behalf of the submitter to make any alterations based upon information provided in the review. Review... 1. Build: * pbuilder [1]: Good * sbuild [2]: Good 2. Lintian [3]: Good 3. Licenses [4]: Good 4. Watch file [uscan --force-download]: Good 5. Build Twice [sudo pbuilder build --twice .dsc]: Good 6. Reproducible builds [5]: Good 7. Install [No previous installs]: Good 8. Upgrade [Over previous installs if any]: N/A Additional... A. Please update 'Standards-Version' in 'debian/control' to latest version 4.7.0 as per Debian policy[6]. B. Please create a repository on Salsa in your own account/namespace and adjust the Vcs fields. This repository can then be moved into the 'debian' group once the package has been accepted into Debian. C. Please consider joinigng the Debian Python Team as has been previously asked. Under this group you will likely find more help and assistance not just now but in the future as you maintain this and other python packages. Summary... I believe python-keep is not yet ready for sponsorship/upload. Could the contributor rectify one of more of the rasied issues. Once updated to your satisfaction and a new upload done, please remove the 'moreinfo' on the Request For Sponsorship (RFS) bug report. Regards Phil [1] pbuilder: * Command: sudo pbuilder build .dsc * Document: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PbuilderHowto. * Document: https://wiki.debian.org/PbuilderTricks [2] sbuild: * Command: sbuild .dsc * Document: https://wiki.debian.org/sbuild [3] lintian: * Command: lintian -v -i -I -E --pedantic --profile debian (*.dsc, *.changes, *.buildinfo). Each can throw up different results, so be thorough. * Document: https://wiki.debian.org/Lintian [4] lrc: * Command: lrc -t * Document: https://wiki.debian.org/CopyrightReviewTools#licenserecon [5] reprotest * Command: sudo reprotest --vary=-build_path,domain_host.use_sudo=1 --auto- build dsc -- schroot unstable-amd64-sbuild * Document: https://wiki.debian.org/ReproducibleBuilds/ * Document: https://wiki.debian.org/ReproducibleBuilds/Howto#Newer_method [6] https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#1071394: RFS: guile-curl/0.9-1 [ITP] -- Guile language bindings for cURL
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "guile-curl": * Package name : guile-curl Version : 0.9-1 Upstream contact : Mike Gran * URL : https://github.com/spk121/guile-curl * License : LGPL-3.0+, FSFULLR, GPL-2+, GPL-3+ * Vcs : https://salsa.debian.org/s20n/guile-curl Section : lisp The source builds the following binary packages: guile-curl - Guile language bindings for cURL To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/guile-curl/ Alternatively, you can download the package with 'dget' using this command: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/guile-curl/guile-curl_0.9-1.dsc Changes for the initial release: guile-curl (0.9-1) unstable; urgency=medium . * Initial release. (Closes: #1071392) Regards, -- Shriram Ravindranathan OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#1069894: RFS: gpscorrelate/2.1-1 -- correlates digital photos with GPS data filling EXIF fields (command line)
Dear Jeroen, Thank you so much for the detailed review. I have made these changes and uploaded a new version <https://mentors.debian.net/package/gpscorrelate/>. Summary of changes since last upload: - Fix licenses in d/copyright - Close ITA bug in changelog - Remove version requirement for libexiv2-dev - Remove gpscorrelate-gui.dirs - Remove incorrect dependency of gpscorrelate on gpscorrelate-gui - Remove override for dh_auto_test - Add autopkgtest based on re2c's d/tests On 06/05/24 17:37, Jeroen Ploemen wrote: * d/README.Debian seems outdated; it talks about a rationale for splitting into two binary packages that aren't interdependent and only recommend one another for docs, but then d/control lists one as a hard dependency of the other. What changed? Does the README or the package need modification? It seems like the README still holds true. Based on my analysis of the makefile, the two packages indeed appear to be independent of each other. I am however not 100% sure about this. I did a sanity check by removing the dependency and only installing the gui package and everything seemed to work fine. Could you please also take a look at it, just to make sure? This dependency has been there since the very first commit <https://salsa.debian.org/debian/gpscorrelate/-/commit/90989886253b1c293435f532f775868d191a4048>. I have removed the dependency in the latest upload. Thanking you, -- Shriram Ravindranathan OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#1069894: RFS: gpscorrelate/2.1-1 -- correlates digital photos with GPS data filling EXIF fields (command line)
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "gpscorrelate": * Package name : gpscorrelate Version : 2.1-1 Upstream contact : Dan Fandrich * URL : https://dfandrich.github.io/gpscorrelate/ * License : GPL-2+ * Vcs : https://salsa.debian.org/debian/gpscorrelate Section : graphics The source builds the following binary packages: gpscorrelate - correlates digital photos with GPS data filling EXIF fields (command line) gpscorrelate-gui - correlates digital photos with GPS data filling EXIF fields (GUI) To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/gpscorrelate/ Alternatively, you can download the package with 'dget' using this command: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/gpscorrelate/gpscorrelate_2.1-1.dsc Changes since the last upload: gpscorrelate (2.1-1) unstable; urgency=medium . * New upstream version 2.1 * d/p/*: - Drop upstream_Adapt-to-API-type-changes-in-exiv2-0.28.0.patch: applied upstream - Add 0001-Remove-remote-image-links-from-documentation.patch * d/copyright: - Update copyright years - Simplify file list using wildcards - Remove deleted files from copyright - Add Upstream-Contact information - Add new maintainer to copyright * d/control: - Replace deprecated build-dep pkg-config with pkgconf - Bump Standards-Version to 4.7.0 - Update maintainer name Regards, -- Shriram Ravindranathan OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#1067930: RFS: python-keep/2.10.1-1 [ITP] -- Personal shell command keeper and snippets manager
Dear Mentors, This package "python-keep" is a dependency of the new upstream version of another package that I am adopting called "howdoi" <https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/howdoi> Neither of these packages have salsa repositories under the debian group yet. Could you please create these two repositories for me? Thanking you, -- Shriram Ravindranathan OpenPGP_0xFC7E951A7BEF0836.asc Description: OpenPGP public key OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#1067930: RFS: python-keep/2.10.1-1 [ITP] -- Personal shell command keeper and snippets manager
Hi Andrey, Yes the salsa repository does not exist yet, could you please create a repository for it under the debian namespace? It would be great if you could create the repository with the name "python-keep". I'll change the vcs link and do a reupload to mentors. On 29/03/24 13:13, Andrey Rakhmatullin wrote: On Fri, Mar 29, 2024 at 12:52:03PM +0530, Shriram Ravindranathan wrote: * Vcs : https://salsa.debian.org/debian/keep This doesn't exist. Regards, -- Shriram Ravindranathan OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#1067930: RFS: python-keep/2.10.1-1 [ITP] -- Personal shell command keeper and snippets manager
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "python-keep": * Package name : python-keep Version : 2.10.1-1 Upstream contact : Himanshu Mishra * URL : https://github.com/orkohunter/keep * License : Expat * Vcs : https://salsa.debian.org/debian/keep Section : python The source builds the following binary packages: python3-keep - Personal shell command keeper and snippets manager To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/python-keep/ Alternatively, you can download the package with 'dget' using this command: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/python-keep/python-keep_2.10.1-1.dsc Changes for the initial release: python-keep (2.10.1-1) unstable; urgency=medium . * Initial release. (Closes: #1067928) Regards, -- Shriram Ravindranathan OpenPGP_0xFC7E951A7BEF0836.asc Description: OpenPGP public key OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Uscan no longer works with GitLab tags
Dear Mentors, I noticed from the past couple of days, uscan seems to be having trouble finding files from the gitlab tags page. ``` $ uscan uscan warn: In debian/watch no matching files for watch line https://gitlab.com/saalen/highlight/tags?sort=updated_desc .*/archive/(\d\S+)/.*\.tar\.gz.* ``` Checking the same pattern with grep shows that it does find a match ``` $ curl -L "https://gitlab.com/saalen/highlight/tags?sort=updated_desc"; | grep -E ".*/archive/([0-9]\S+)/.*\.tar\.gz.*" % Total% Received % Xferd Average Speed TimeTime Time Current Dload Upload Total SpentLeft Speed 100 126 100 1260 0287 0 --:--:-- --:--:-- --:--:-- 287 0 00 00 0 0 0 --:--:-- 0:00:01 --:--:-- 0 100 85448 100 854480 0 51822 0 0:00:01 0:00:01 --:--:-- 401k ``` It seems like a few other packages are also having similar troubles with uscan, for example lomiri <https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/lomiri> Is there a way to fix this? Regards, -- Shriram Ravindranathan OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#1067048: RFS: cxxopts/3.2.1-1 [ITA] -- Lightweight C++ option parser library
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "cxxopts": * Package name : cxxopts Version : 3.2.1-1 Upstream contact : [fill in name and email of upstream] * URL : https://github.com/jarro2783/cxxopts * License : Expat, Boost-1.0 * Vcs : https://salsa.debian.org/debian/cxxopts Section : libs The source builds the following binary packages: libcxxopts-dev - Lightweight C++ option parser library To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/cxxopts/ Alternatively, you can download the package with 'dget' using this command: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/cxxopts/cxxopts_3.2.1-1.dsc Changes since the last upload: cxxopts (3.2.1-1) unstable; urgency=medium . * New upstream version 3.2.1 * New maintainer (Closes: #1065748) * d/copyright: + Update copyright years + Add new maintainer to copyright * d/control: + Replace deprecated build-dep pkg-config with pkgconf + Add new maintainer to maintainer field * d/p/0001-install-pkgconfig-file-into-arch-indep-usr-share-pkg.patch: + Add Forwarded info to patch header Regards, -- Shriram Ravindranathan OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Is there a way to set up a sid environment at this time?
Hi Andrey, When I did a dist-upgrade from trixie it seemed to remove a bunch of necessary packages with error messages like this: `dpkg: libdb5.3:amd64: dependency problems, but removing anyway as you requested: apt-utils depends on libdb5.3.` Although just now I noticed there are no errors when I replace trixie with sid in sources.list and run `apt upgrade`. I suppose this would be sufficient for packaging? On 12/03/24 19:33, Andrey Rakhmatullin wrote: You should be able to debootstrap testing and you also should be able to upgrade it to sid. This worked for me right now for amd64. -- Shriram Ravindranathan OpenPGP_0xFC7E951A7BEF0836.asc Description: OpenPGP public key OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Is there a way to set up a sid environment at this time?
Dear Mentors, Unfortunately, my SD card got corrupted (SD Card moment) and I do not have access to a sid environment right now. Is there a way to debootstrap a sid environment for packaging (from trixie perhaps) while the time_t transition is going on? Thanks, -- Shriram Ravindranathan OpenPGP_0xFC7E951A7BEF0836.asc Description: OpenPGP public key OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#1065078: Question about the debian group on Salsa
Dear mentors, I'm curious about the guidelines for putting a package under the debian namespace on Salsa <https://salsa.debian.org/debian>. I wasn't able to find much discourse about this online. This package didn't have a salsa repository created for it, I am unsure whether I should create a repository under my own namespace or if the package should be placed under the debian namespace. Thank you, -- Shriram Ravindranathan OpenPGP_0xFC7E951A7BEF0836.asc Description: OpenPGP public key OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#1065078: RFS: planner/0.14.92-1 [ITA] -- project management application
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "planner": * Package name : planner Version : 0.14.92-1 Upstream contact : [fill in name and email of upstream] * URL : https://wiki.gnome.org/action/show/Apps/Planner * License : GPL-2+, GPL-2, BSD-like * Vcs : [fill in URL of packaging vcs] Section : gnome The source builds the following binary packages: planner - project management application planner-doc - Documentation for planner planner-data - Data files for planner To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/planner/ Alternatively, you can download the package with 'dget' using this command: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/planner/planner_0.14.92-1.dsc Changes since the last upload: planner (0.14.92-1) unstable; urgency=medium . * New upstream version 0.14.92 * New Maintainer (Closes: #892919) * d/control: - Bump Standards-Version to 4.6.2 - Bump debhelper-compat version to 13 - Add new maintainer's name to maintainer field. * d/copyright: - Change source url to use https - Add new authors' copyright details - Update copyright years - Add new maintainer to copyright field * d/watch: - Bump watch version to 4 * Add d/upstream/metadata * Add libplanner-*.so symlink to not-installed * Add usr/share/GConf to planner-data.install * Add planner.lintian-override (unnecessary ldconfig activation) * Add planner-data.lintian-override (missing desktop command) . [Helmut Grohne] * d/rules: Fix FTCBFS, skip gtkdoc in arch-only build (Closes: #1062785) . [Marriott NZ] * d/planner.mime: Remove quoted placeholder from mailcap entry. Fixes lintian warning (Closes: #987406) Regards, -- Shriram Ravindranathan OpenPGP_0xFC7E951A7BEF0836.asc Description: OpenPGP public key OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Salsa Repository Access
Dear mentors, My package "highlight" was uploaded to the debian archive. I would like to have access to the salsa repository <https://salsa.debian.org/debian/highlight> so that I may update it with the latest changes. my salsa username is s20n <https://salsa.debian.org/s20n> Thanks, -- Shriram Ravindranathan OpenPGP_0xFC7E951A7BEF0836.asc Description: OpenPGP public key OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#1064346: New upload with fixes
Thank you Soren and Bastien, I have uploaded a new version of highlight <https://mentors.debian.net/package/highlight/>changes since last upload: - Add sources to d/missing-sources/ - Add lintian overrides for all missing-sources with the paths to the sources - Add copyright stanzas for newly added missing-sources - Add d/p/0004-escape-groff-backslash.patch (Fixes groff syntax error and lintian warning) -- Shriram Ravindranathan OpenPGP_0xFC7E951A7BEF0836.asc Description: OpenPGP public key OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Bug#1064346: Source is missing errors on HTML source files
Thank you Bastien, I tried doing this but it appears that the scripts to build these example files all depend on having the highlight binary itself installed on the machine. I am unsure whether it is okay to have the package depend on itself for building. On 21/02/24 11:20 pm, roucaries bastien wrote: You should rebuilt from source also... See for instance how I do with node-long -- Shriram Ravindranathan ters OpenPGP_0xFC7E951A7BEF0836.asc Description: OpenPGP public key OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Bug#1064346: Source is missing errors on HTML source files
Upon inspecting the embedded font, It seems to be a bespoke icon-font generated using a tool called "Fontello" from one of the icons of the octicons iconset from Atom <https://github.com/primer/octicons> (MIT Licensed SVGs) The font has only 1 glyph, Would it suffice to add this source image to d/missing-souces and add that copyright info to d/copyright? On 21/02/24 9:56 am, Soren Stoutner wrote: Shriram, 1. For anything that has the unminified source in the upstream tarball, I would just create a lintian override with a comment listing the full path to the source for each file. You can see an example of how this can be done here: https://salsa.debian.org/qt-kde-team/qt/qtwebengine/-/blob/master/debian/source/lintian-overrides?ref_type=heads Typically you only copy the source to the debian/missing-sources directory when it is not included in the upstream tarball and you have had to acquire it from another place. 2. The github link below includes an embedded font in woff format. Typically, fonts like this would be considered compiled, so a separate font source would be needed. However, I’m not sure what the Debian guidance for dealing with an HTML embedded font like this. If someone else on mentors doesn’t know, I would recommend you ask on debian-legal. As these are mostly README files, and if it becomes difficult for you to acquire the source for some of them, you might consider excluding those you can’t get the source for, at least temporarily, using Files-Excluded in debian/copyright (and then running uscan, which will produce a modified tarball that does not include the problematic files). For example, see: https://salsa.debian.org/cryptocoin-team/electrum/-/blob/master/debian/copyright?ref_type=heads Whether this is a good option depends on how helpful those README files are for the users of your package. If you go this route, you should add +dfsg to the version of your package to indicate that the upstream tarball has been repackaged to remove files that are not free (or for which the source is not available). Soren -- Shriram Ravindranathan ters OpenPGP_0xFC7E951A7BEF0836.asc Description: OpenPGP public key OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Bug#1064346: Source is missing errors on HTML source files
Thanks, Soren. It looks like most of these files have just one or two lines that are extremely long. These are mostly README files. Most of them seem to have this github-markdown.css <https://gist.github.com/jojoldu/9cb1b6a5110619e221dfd4603f30ddd4> minified and pasted in them. While others have the sources that were used to generate them listed in the same folder. Should I copy these sources into the d/missing-sources directory? On 21/02/24 2:28 am, Soren Stoutner wrote: The question is if the long lines in these HTML files are actually indications that the HTML files are not the original source. This usually happens in one of two cases. 1. The files have been minified. 2. The files were originally created in another format and converted to HTML. Sometimes HTML files naturally have long lines. If you look at the descriptions of the lintian warnings, they acknowledge that this is an imperfect check that will result in some false-positives. If that is the case, the HTML files are the original source, and they have not been minified, then you can override these warnings with a description as to why. On Tuesday, February 20, 2024 9:08:17 AM MST Shriram Ravindranathan wrote: Hello mentors, I am getting a few lintian "source-is-missing" errors for some HTML files. These HTML files are infact present in the source code but they have too many lines which triggers a "very-long-line-length-in-source-file" lintian tag and that in turn causes the "source-is-missing" error. Most of the info I could find in the policy manual and in the forums pertained to binary files that were included in the source, the strategy these resources suggested were 1. Repack upstream tar with the source code of these files 2. Add the source code to the d/missing-sources directory I don't think either of these are viable options in my case. I was wondering whether it would be okay to suppress these errors. Is there any other way to solve this? -- Shriram Ravindranathan -- Shriram Ravindranathan OpenPGP_0xFC7E951A7BEF0836.asc Description: OpenPGP public key OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#1064346: Source is missing errors on HTML source files
Hello mentors, I am getting a few lintian "source-is-missing" errors for some HTML files. These HTML files are infact present in the source code but they have too many lines which triggers a "very-long-line-length-in-source-file" lintian tag and that in turn causes the "source-is-missing" error. Most of the info I could find in the policy manual and in the forums pertained to binary files that were included in the source, the strategy these resources suggested were 1. Repack upstream tar with the source code of these files 2. Add the source code to the d/missing-sources directory I don't think either of these are viable options in my case. I was wondering whether it would be okay to suppress these errors. Is there any other way to solve this? -- Shriram Ravindranathan OpenPGP_0xFC7E951A7BEF0836.asc Description: OpenPGP public key OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#1064346: RFS: highlight/4.10-1 [ITA] -- Universal source code to formatted text converter
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "highlight": * Package name : highlight Version : 4.10-1 Upstream contact : Andre Simon * URL : http://www.andre-simon.de * License : Expat, LGPL-2.1+, GPL-3+ * Vcs : https://salsa.debian.org/debian/highlight Section : devel The source builds the following binary packages: highlight - Universal source code to formatted text converter highlight-common - source code to formatted text converter (architecture independent files) libhighlight-perl - perl bindings for highlight source code to formatted text converter To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/highlight/ Alternatively, you can download the package with 'dget' using this command: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/h/highlight/highlight_4.10-1.dsc Changes since the last upload: highlight (4.10-1) unstable; urgency=medium . * New upstream version 4.10 * New maintainer (Closes: #1022114) * d/copyright: - Add new maintainer to copyright - Convert copyright to DEP5 format - Remove stanzas for files that no longer exist * d/control: - Add new maintainer's name to Maintainer field - Update VCS-Browser field to canonical URI * d/p/*: Remove git-debcherry artifacts and follow DEP-3 * Add debian/upstream/metadata Regards, -- Shriram Ravindranathan OpenPGP_0xFC7E951A7BEF0836.asc Description: OpenPGP public key OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: New contributor question
Hi Darren, Is your bug already in the Bug Tracking System <https://wiki.debian.org/BTS>? If not, you might want to start by using the reportbug <https://wiki.debian.org/reportbug> tool. On 12/02/24 3:34 am, Darren Tomblin wrote: Hi I’m wondering what I have to do to say I want to work on a bug I’ve searched for this and can’t find anything I don’t know if I was searching for the right thing thanks 73, Darren Tomblin KC9JJJ -- Shriram Ravindranathan OpenPGP_0xFC7E951A7BEF0836.asc Description: OpenPGP public key OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#1063651: RFS: letterize/1.5-1 [ITA] -- phone digits to letter-mnemonics
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "letterize": * Package name : letterize Version : 1.5-1 Upstream contact : Eric S. Raymond * URL :http://www.catb.org/~esr/letterize/ * License : BSD-3-clause * Vcs :https://salsa.debian.org/debian/letterize Section : misc The source builds the following binary packages: letterize - phone digits to letter-mnemonics To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/letterize/ Alternatively, you can download the package with 'dget' using this command: dget -xhttps://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/letterize/letterize_1.5-1.dsc Changes since the last upload: letterize (1.5-1) unstable; urgency=medium . * New upstream release. * New maintainer (Closes: #1050242) * debian/control: - Add new maintainer's name to maintainer field. * debian/copyright: - Add new maintainer to copyright field. Regards, -- Shriram Ravindranathan OpenPGP_0xFC7E951A7BEF0836.asc Description: OpenPGP public key OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Lintian 'privacy-breach-generic' warning for installed examples
Dear Mentors, I am packaging a C++ TUI library called FTXUI in which there's an examples/ folder which I am installing to /usr/share/doc/ftxui-dev/examples/ One of these examples is for using the library with webassembly is a HTML file that loads the JS version of xterm from a CDN. I was wondering if this is a false-positive that I should override or whether I need to create a patch and edit the HTML files to remove these links. Thanks, Shriram OpenPGP_0xFC7E951A7BEF0836.asc Description: OpenPGP public key OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#1063471: RFS: ftxui/5.0.0-1 [ITP] -- simple cross-platform C++ library for terminal based user interfaces
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "ftxui": * Package name : ftxui Version : 5.0.0-1 Upstream contact : Arthur Sonzogni * URL : https://github.com/ArthurSonzogni/FTXUI * License : Expat * Vcs : https://salsa.debian.org/debian/ftxui Section : libs The source builds the following binary packages: ftxui-dev - simple cross-platform C++ library for terminal based user interfaces To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/ftxui/ Alternatively, you can download the package with 'dget' using this command: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/f/ftxui/ftxui_5.0.0-1.dsc Changes for the initial release: ftxui (5.0.0-1) unstable; urgency=medium . * Initial release. (Closes: #1062434) Regards, Shriram Ravindranathan OpenPGP_0xFC7E951A7BEF0836.asc Description: OpenPGP public key OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
pkgconfig multiarch installation woes
Dear Mentors,
I am packaging magic_enum, a header-only C++ library which uses CMake
with GNUInstallDirs. AFAIK the package should be arch-independent as
there is no architecture dependent code in it.
Here are the generated files:
debian/libmagicenum-dev
├── DEBIAN
│ ├── control
│ └── md5sums
└── usr
├── include
│ ├── magic_enum.hpp
│ ├── magic_enum_all.hpp
│ ├── magic_enum_containers.hpp
│ ├── magic_enum_flags.hpp
│ ├── magic_enum_format.hpp
│ ├── magic_enum_fuse.hpp
│ ├── magic_enum_iostream.hpp
│ ├── magic_enum_switch.hpp
│ └── magic_enum_utility.hpp
├── lib
│ ├── cmake
│ │ └── magic_enum
│ │ ├── magic_enumConfig.cmake
│ │ └── magic_enumConfigVersion.cmake
│ └── pkgconfig
│ └── magic_enum.pc
└── share
├── doc
│ └── libmagicenum-dev
│ ├── changelog.Debian.gz
│ └── copyright
└── magic_enum
└── package.xml
12 directories, 17 files
Previously I was advised to set it toArchitecture: any and Multi-arch:
same since I was shipping files tousr/lib, but when I do so, lintian
gives me the following warnings:
X: libmagicenum-dev: package-contains-no-arch-dependent-files
N:
N: All files in this package are architecture-independent, but the package is
not marked Architecture: all.
N:
N: The package should probably be marked Architecture: all.
N:
N: Please refer to Architecture (Section 5.6.8) in the Debian Policy Manual
for details.
N:
N: Visibility: info
N: Show-Always: no
N: Check: files/architecture
N: This tag is experimental.
W: libmagicenum-dev: pkg-config-unavailable-for-cross-compilation
[usr/lib/pkgconfig/magic_enum.pc]
N:
N: The specified pkg-config(1) file is installed to /usr/lib/pkgconfig. As
the cross-compilation wrapper of pkg-config does not search this directory
N: the file is unavailable under cross-compilation.
N:
N: Please install the file to /usr/lib/${DEB_HOST_MULTIARCH}/pkgconfig
instead.
N:
N: For projects that use GNU Autotools, a simple method is moving to a
debhelper compat level of 9 or higher. In the rare case that this file is
N: architecture independent it can be installed to /usr/share/pkgconfig
instead.
N:
N: Visibility: warning
N: Show-Always: no
N: Check: files/pkgconfig
So I switched to Architecture: all andMulti-arch: foreign but the second
warning (pkg-config-unavailable-for-cross-compilation) still persists. I
have tried modifying the source and also tried setting the
CMAKE_INSTALL_LIBDIR variable manually, but somehow I can't get it to
install to the multi-arch libdir.
Can you please help me figure this out?
Thanks,
Shriram
OpenPGP_0xFC7E951A7BEF0836.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: lintian error due to arm64 and aarch64 mismatch on raspberry pi
Thank you, that seems to have resolved it. I changed it to arch:any and multiarch:same. On 11/11/2023 20:10, Andrey Rakhmatullin wrote: On Sat, Nov 11, 2023 at 07:36:07PM +0530, Shriram Ravindranathan wrote: dpkg-deb: building package 'libmagicenum-dev' in '../libmagicenum-dev_0.9.3-1_all.deb'. [...] E: libmagicenum-dev: triplet-dir-and-architecture-mismatch is for arm64 instead of all [usr/lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/] So you are shipping files in /usr/lib inside an arch:all package. You need to change it to arch:any. OpenPGP_0xFC7E951A7BEF0836.asc Description: OpenPGP public key OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: lintian error due to arm64 and aarch64 mismatch on raspberry pi
I just realized that I misread the error message. My apologies. It seems to be expecting all instead of arm64. So how might I build it for all? On 11/11/23 7:36 pm, Shriram Ravindranathan wrote: Dear Mentors, I am trying to build a multiarch package (ITP #1055706) for debian on a raspberry pi. The package builds fine, however, there is a lintian error like so: *Output from *debuild*:* dpkg-deb: building package 'libmagicenum-dev' in '../libmagicenum-dev_0.9.3-1_all.deb'. dpkg-genbuildinfo -O../magic-enum_0.9.3-1_arm64.buildinfo dpkg-genchanges -O../magic-enum_0.9.3-1_arm64.changes dpkg-genchanges: info: including full source code in upload dpkg-source --after-build . dpkg-buildpackage: info: full upload (original source is included) Now running lintian magic-enum_0.9.3-1_arm64.changes ... E: libmagicenum-dev: triplet-dir-and-architecture-mismatch is for arm64 instead of all [usr/lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/] Finished running lintian. *Output from *lintian -i -I --show-overrides*:* E: libmagicenum-dev: triplet-dir-and-architecture-mismatch is for arm64 instead of all [usr/lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/] N: N: This package contains a directory under /lib or /usr/lib which doesn't N: match the proper triplet for the binary package's architecture. This is N: very likely to be a mistake when indicating the underlying build system N: where the files should be installed. N: N: Please refer to File System Structure (Section 9.1.1) in the Debian Policy N: Manual for details. N: N: Visibility: error N: Show-Always: no N: Check: files/architecture when I run dpkg --print-architecture it says arm64 but when I run the command arch it says aarch64. Am I doing something wrong here? how do I get it to build for aarch64? -- Shriram Ravindranathan ters OpenPGP_0xFC7E951A7BEF0836.asc Description: OpenPGP public key OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
lintian error due to arm64 and aarch64 mismatch on raspberry pi
Dear Mentors, I am trying to build a multiarch package (ITP #1055706) for debian on a raspberry pi. The package builds fine, however, there is a lintian error like so: *Output from *debuild*:* dpkg-deb: building package 'libmagicenum-dev' in '../libmagicenum-dev_0.9.3-1_all.deb'. dpkg-genbuildinfo -O../magic-enum_0.9.3-1_arm64.buildinfo dpkg-genchanges -O../magic-enum_0.9.3-1_arm64.changes dpkg-genchanges: info: including full source code in upload dpkg-source --after-build . dpkg-buildpackage: info: full upload (original source is included) Now running lintian magic-enum_0.9.3-1_arm64.changes ... E: libmagicenum-dev: triplet-dir-and-architecture-mismatch is for arm64 instead of all [usr/lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/] Finished running lintian. *Output from *lintian -i -I --show-overrides*:* E: libmagicenum-dev: triplet-dir-and-architecture-mismatch is for arm64 instead of all [usr/lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/] N: N: This package contains a directory under /lib or /usr/lib which doesn't N: match the proper triplet for the binary package's architecture. This is N: very likely to be a mistake when indicating the underlying build system N: where the files should be installed. N: N: Please refer to File System Structure (Section 9.1.1) in the Debian Policy N: Manual for details. N: N: Visibility: error N: Show-Always: no N: Check: files/architecture when I run dpkg --print-architecture it says arm64 but when I run the command arch it says aarch64. Am I doing something wrong here? how do I get it to build for aarch64? OpenPGP_0xFC7E951A7BEF0836.asc Description: OpenPGP public key OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
