Hi Andreas, I am able to build the package with: ARCH=i386 git-buildpackage --git-pbuilder
As libOpenBUGS.so is a i386 library, I have not activated amd64 build for the moment (by adding g++-multilib in Build-Depends as upstream recommend, moreover this method does not seem correct for a good Debian package. Am I right?). Best regards, Dylan 2014-07-14 23:03 GMT+02:00 Andreas Tille <[email protected]>: > Hi Dylan, > > before I can answer your questions I tried to build from the Git archive > using git-buildpackage. Unfortunately this fails with > > ... > dh binary > dpkg-genchanges -sa -sa >../openbugs_3.2.3-1_amd64.changes > dpkg-genchanges: error: binary build with no binary artifacts found; > cannot distribute > dpkg-buildpackage: error: dpkg-genchanges gave error exit status 2 > gbp:error: '~/bin/git-pbuilder' failed: it exited with 1 > > > Are you able to build the package successfully? I wonder what might be > wrong in this case at my side since I did not observed things like this > before. > > Kind regards > > Andreas. > > On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 08:53:31PM +0200, Dylan wrote: > > Hi Andreas, > > Accordingly with upstream permission to distribute the libOpenBUGS.so > > binary [1,2], I modified the copyright file [3]. > > > > I have some questions/problems to finish my package: > > > > -I try to fix "hardening-no-relro usr/bin/OpenBUGSCli" lintian warning > > using some tips from [4] but it doesn't work... if anyone have an idea to > > help me? > > > > -As libOpenBUGS.so is a private shared library it seem better to put it > in > > /usr/lib/$(DEB_HOST_MULTIARCH)/openbugs/ instead in > > /usr/lib/$(DEB_HOST_MULTIARCH)/ , it is right? > > > > Best regards, > > Dylan > > > > [1] https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=bugs;c502f8a6.1407 > > [2] http://sourceforge.net/p/openbugs/code/1018/ > > [3] > > > http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=debian-med/openbugs.git;a=commitdiff;h=d909b2a19e220584710e0e45dfc161e1b842dc00 > > [4] https://wiki.debian.org/HardeningWalkthrough > > > > > > 2014-07-09 23:02 GMT+02:00 Andreas Tille <[email protected]>: > > > > > Hi Dylan, > > > > > > as I said I'm a bit reluctant since I try to avoid this kind of > > > packages. I personally do not know the current opinion of ftpmaster. > > > We might try to upload to new and see what they might say if you just > > > include the copy of the upstream mail. > > > > > > Kind regards > > > > > > Andreas. > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 09, 2014 at 09:38:42PM +0200, Dylan wrote: > > > > Hi Andreas, > > > > I am in contact with the developers. In order to give us the > permission > > > to > > > > distribute the binary, they propose to append the following sentence > to > > > the > > > > COPYING file in the Linux source package: > > > > > > > > "[See each individual source file (.odc) for an exact license > statement.] > > > > All of these sources are GPL-compatible, therefore the OpenBUGS > shared > > > > library libOpenBUGS.so may be redistributed under the terms of the > GPL > > > > version 3." > > > > > > > > It's the good way to do this or we need a special permission to > > > distribute > > > > the binary in a Debian package? For example, if they post a message > with > > > > the permission on Debian Med mailing list it's adequate? > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > Dylan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2014-06-15 18:57 GMT+02:00 Andreas Tille <[email protected]>: > > > > > > > > > Hi Dylan, > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 11:17:16AM +0200, Dylan wrote: > > > > > > > Despite the open licensing question currently libOpenBUGS.so > is a > > > > > binary > > > > > > > without source as far as I can see. So the correct way would > be > > > to ask > > > > > > > upstream for the source and remove the binary from the > orig.tar.gz > > > > > which > > > > > > > we use for the Debian package (by using Files-Excluded in > > > > > > > debian/copyright). > > > > > > > > > > > > I can not exclude libOpenBUGS.so because it is the core of > OpenBUGS, > > > its > > > > > > sources seems to be on sourceforge [1] but it was writing in > > > Component > > > > > > Pascal which is impossible to compile on Linux for the moment. > So, my > > > > > plans > > > > > > was to package openbugs as non-free package which include > > > libOpenBUGS.so > > > > > as > > > > > > binary. It is impossible to do this in this way? > > > > > > > > > > Hmmm, well, that's probably possible but not nice in any case. You > > > > > should definitely teach upstream to use FreePascal and explicitly > ask > > > for > > > > > permission to distribute the binary (and add this to the copyright > > > file). > > > > > > > > > > Kind regards > > > > > > > > > > Andreas. > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > http://fam-tille.de > > > > > -- > http://fam-tille.de > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact > [email protected] > Archive: https://lists.debian.org/[email protected] > >
