On 09/25/2014 04:21 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote: > The Breaks/Replaces was only needed because different versions of the > liblwgeom-2.1.2 package contained conflicting files. > > Now that the package is liblwgeom-2.1.4 there is no longer a conflict.
Ah, right. Thanks. Corrected. >>> I've also changed liblwgeom-2.1.4.install & libpostgis-java.install to >>> use >>> 2* instead of the full version numbers >> >> Oh, that works? Nice! > > Yes, wildcards are supported by dh_install, making life much easier. :) I now realize it's just the .install files, not .symbols. Which would be weird. Given I just stumbled over a "2.1.4dev" version for the JAR for this release, I only used a ? wildcard, so this would still catch the bogus "2.1.4dev", rather than silently match. Committed and pushed. >>> mh_cleanpom caused a FTBFS in my builds because of the invalid >>> whitespace >>> at the start of java/jdbc/pom.xml. I added a patch to remove this >>> whitespace. >>> >>> http://git.linuxminded.nl/?p=pkg-grass/postgis;a=commitdiff;h=a86c253d21f982d0e1c81472ede745e6454a2b89 >> >> Thanks. It didn't FTBFS on my testing machine. Which I'm just upgrading, >> now. It FTBFS on pgapt/jenkins. > > Chances are good the FTBFS on pgapt is caused by mh_cleanpom if it uses > current sid build environments. I wanted to check the build logs, but I > don't have a login for the pgapt jenkins. Yeah, the logs seem to indicate that problem. I just triggered another build. You can ask Christoph Berg <[email protected]> if you want permission to the pgapt/jenkins service. > We can use some more wildcards, but we also need a lot of separate license > specifications for individual files. > > For doc/* CC-BY-SA-3.0 should be used, but there are some differently > licensed files under the doc directory (mostly Makefile templates). > > The autotools script have different authors, copyright years and licenses, > requiring a lot of extra license specifications. > > There has been some debate about what to document in the copyright file > triggered by the recently introduced lintian checks for dep5, that was > mostly about generated files from autotools. > > The relevant documentation is: > > https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/#copyright-field > > And the related policy sections: > > https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-source.html#s-dpkgcopyright > https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-docs.html#s-copyrightfile > https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-archive.html#s-pkgcopyright > > The policy doesn't specify much other that that the verbatim copyright and > license needs to be included. > > The copyright-format specifiction says: > > "The Copyright field collects all relevant copyright notices for the files > of this paragraph. Not all copyright notices may apply to every individual > file, and years of publication for one copyright holder may be gathered > together. For example, if file A has:" > > So it's possible to more group files with the same license even if the > copyright is not identical between the files. Thanks for all these pointers. I'll dig through those later today. I understood you're currently working on it? Please feel free to push to the git repo. Regards Markus -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: https://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
