Re: sysinfo upstream tarball problems

2005-10-17 Thread Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
On Mon, 17 Oct 2005, Simon Richter wrote: > Both solutions are correct, modifying the Makefile is easier to > understand for someone else looking at the package and will also show a Modifying an *automake* generated makefile and "easier to understand" do not belong in the same sentence. Fixin

Re: sysinfo upstream tarball problems

2005-10-17 Thread Simon Richter
Hi, Adriaan Peeters wrote: sysinfodocdir = ${prefix}/doc/sysinfo sysinfodoc_DATA = \ README\ COPYING\ AUTHORS\ ChangeLog\ INSTALL\ NEWS EXTRA_DIST = \ $(sysinfodoc_DATA)\ How should I advise upstream to fix this (and remove the files

Re: sysinfo upstream tarball problems

2005-10-17 Thread Adriaan Peeters
On Mon, 2005-10-17 at 10:38 +0200, Simon Richter wrote: > > Furthermore I had to rerun automake because the original Makefile > > installed extra doc files under /usr/doc/sysinfo. Is this the correct > > solution or should I remove the files after running upstream make? > > Both solutions are cor

Re: sysinfo upstream tarball problems

2005-10-17 Thread Simon Richter
Hi, Adriaan Peeters wrote: W: sysinfo source: configure-generated-file-in-source config.log How can I resolve this without an override? Not at all. It's an error upstream has made, but unless it affects the build in a harmful way (which I doubt) I would just leave it at that and ignore t

sysinfo upstream tarball problems

2005-10-17 Thread Adriaan Peeters
Hello, I am packaging sysinfo (#333680) and I have some problems with the upstream tarball. Upstream contains (limited list): config.log config.status several .Po files This is all cleaned up in the upstream distclean (which is called from debian/rules clean), but Lintian complains about it anyw