Hi Yaroslav and all, Grooming Aghermann with lintian now comes down to these few warnings:
W: aghermann: package-name-doesnt-match-sonames libaghcore0 libexstrom0 libsigfile0 W: aghermann: non-dev-pkg-with-shlib-symlink usr/lib/libsigfile.so.0.0.0 usr/lib/libsigfile.so W: aghermann: non-dev-pkg-with-shlib-symlink usr/lib/libaghcore.so.0.0.0 usr/lib/libaghcore.so W: aghermann: non-dev-pkg-with-shlib-symlink usr/lib/libexstrom.so.0.0.0 usr/lib/libexstrom.so As I could figure from http://lintian.debian.org/tags/*, both warnings are a fairly common issue seen in many packages where a package has some libraries which are for internal use only; and so has mine. One straight solution would be simply to link statically against those libraries so that no .so files need to be installed and shipped in the .deb any longer. And I can indeed do away with libaghcore0 and libexstrom0, but the third one (libsigfile.so) is, actually, shared between aghermann the executable proper, and two smallish accessory "tools" (edfhed and edfhed-gtk). Unless I am enlightened with a better way to achieve a perfect clearance in this matter, I tend to think the solution here would be in splitting the project into three packages, something like libsigfile, aghermann, and aghermann-tools. Or will perhaps "overriding" this warning be sufficient? WRT licenses, all is clean (the only third-party code is under src/libexstrom, and it is clearly stated as GPL-licensed on exstrom.com) and all sources contain proper attribution. Incidentally, I am still a little uncertain about the specific GPL version I want to use. All my sources have "GPL" in the header for a license (that is, no indication whether it be version 2 or 3, or "any later version at your option"). Is such brevity acceptable? Cheers, Andrei On 29 November 2011 21:48, Yaroslav Halchenko <[email protected]> wrote: > The first buddy of yours should now be 'lintian' tool -- is it silent if > you give it your generated .changes file? > is debian/copyright file complete? (e.g. nothing additional get found > using licensecheck or simple grep)? ;-) > > On Tue, 29 Nov 2011, andrei zavada wrote: >> > * maintenance "inside Debian Med team" sounds good to me too, since >> > �NeuroDebian team is also a part of it and it would allow more helpful >> > �hands to keep it in good shape ;-) >> Now, what do I do next?� Actually, I routinely do dpkg-buildpackage for >> amd64 and i386 (in a chrooted sid) and post .debs to >> [3]github.com/hmmr/aghermann and [4]sf.net/projects/aghermann.� Perhaps, >> for a start, it would be great if someone knowledgable look into >> debian/control to do QA on my "best effort"? (The tarball includes the >> debian-specific bits, but github makes it really easy.) > > -- > Yaroslav O. Halchenko > Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences > Dartmouth College, 419 Moore Hall, Hinman Box 6207, Hanover, NH 03755 > Phone: +1 (603) 646-9834 Fax: +1 (603) 646-1419 > WWW: http://www.linkedin.com/in/yarik -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CADRQDB32z7r=q+Z==qt80ssf_8smq1-xb39j41yj+sdcfex...@mail.gmail.com
