Re: spcaview : package review needed

2006-04-26 Thread Le_Vert
Russ Allbery a écrit : Paul Wise [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: That was actually from linda, not lintian. ldd and objdump -x would indeed be helpful to find the problem. The linda warning about linking against a binary that you don't use symbols from is very prone to false positives and

Re: spcaview : package review needed

2006-04-26 Thread Lawrence Williams
Hello, As one of the SDL maintainers, I can confirm for you that the package depending on libsdl1.2debian is completely okay. It is indeed a metapackage which pulls in libsdl1.2debian-alsa by default (now), but can use others (libsdl1.2debian-oss for example), as well. You can simply override

Re: spcaview : package review needed

2006-04-26 Thread Lawrence Williams
As long as it includes a Depends: on libsdl1.2debian, it will be fine. Lawrence On Wednesday 26 April 2006 13:49, Le_Vert wrote: Hello :-) So I can just leave my package as it is, nothing more to do ? Lawrence Williams a écrit : Hello, As one of the SDL maintainers, I can confirm for

Re: spcaview : package review needed

2006-04-25 Thread Le_Vert
Le mardi 25 avril 2006 à 11:20 +0800, Paul Wise a écrit : On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 23:48 +0200, Le_Vert wrote: spcaview : package review needed The convention is RFC: package -- package description http://www.le-vert.net/divers/debian-package/spcaview/spcaview_20051212-1.dsc Best

Re: spcaview : package review needed

2006-04-25 Thread Justin Pryzby
On Tue, Apr 25, 2006 at 10:09:34PM +0200, Le_Vert wrote: Le mardi 25 avril 2006 ?? 11:20 +0800, Paul Wise a ??crit : On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 23:48 +0200, Le_Vert wrote: spcaview : package review needed The convention is RFC: package -- package description http://www.le-vert.net

Re: spcaview : package review needed

2006-04-25 Thread Paul Wise
On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 16:14 -0400, Justin Pryzby wrote: I'm using dpatch right now, pretty nice, thanks :-) FYI many people are now starting to use quilt. For good reason, it rocks! * debian/watch: please add one (read uscan(1) for more info) Added. Looks great but is it usefull

Re: spcaview : package review needed

2006-04-25 Thread Russ Allbery
Paul Wise [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: That was actually from linda, not lintian. ldd and objdump -x would indeed be helpful to find the problem. The linda warning about linking against a binary that you don't use symbols from is very prone to false positives and often has to just be ignored.

spcaview : package review needed

2006-04-24 Thread Le_Vert
Hello, Could you check this package before my sponsor upload it ? : http://www.le-vert.net/divers/debian-package/spcaview/spcaview_20051212-1.dsc http://www.le-vert.net/divers/debian-package/spcaview/spcaview_20051212-1.diff.gz

Re: spcaview : package review needed

2006-04-24 Thread Paul Wise
On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 23:48 +0200, Le_Vert wrote: spcaview : package review needed The convention is RFC: package -- package description http://www.le-vert.net/divers/debian-package/spcaview/spcaview_20051212-1.dsc Best to just specify the dsc/diff so we can go dget -x url.dsc for a more

Re: spcaview : package review needed

2006-04-24 Thread Ted Percival
Paul Wise wrote: * debian/changelog: the version should be 0.0.20051212 or 0.0.0.20051212 or something so that if upstream changes their version scheme, you won't have to use [an] epoch. Isn't that exactly what the epoch is for? -T signature.asc Description: OpenPGP

Re: spcaview : package review needed

2006-04-24 Thread Ben Finney
On 25-Apr-2006, Ted Percival wrote: Paul Wise wrote: * debian/changelog: the version should be 0.0.20051212 or 0.0.0.20051212 or something so that if upstream changes their version scheme, you won't have to use [an] epoch. Isn't that exactly what the epoch is for?