Hi Malihe, On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 04:20:40PM +0430, Malihe Asemani wrote: > I think the packaging process is almost done.
:-) > I have just some questions. > > 1) I dont know if there is a special format for README, copyright and NEWS > or not? I just used the format which was used in the other packages like > suitename, as you know ;) You mean debian/README.Debian (which is basically free form) and debian/NEWS.Debian (which follows a debian/changelog syntax but is *not* needed here since we have no news compared to previous versions of this package) > Also, 'debchange' caused I wonder if there are some other special commands > for creating or editing these files (just like debchange)? Not that I'd be aware of. > 2) I saw a warning on lintian's output about manpages. > > W: king-probe: binary-without-manpage usr/bin/king-probe > > Does every package need to have a manpage? There is no strict need (otherwise you would get a lintian error instead of a warning) but it would be really nice to have one. > Even if the upstream has not any > specific documentation in source code? Again, Is there some tools to > automate creation or editing manpages (their format is unknown for me! I usually install the package and run the script through help2man. Since I tend to forget help2man options I created this small script https://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/debian-med/trunk/helper-scripts/createmanpages?view=markup where you need to replace some stings in "<>". In the end you get an URL where you can find help about editing manpages. > 3) In our first discussions on this package, you mentioned that I need a > get-orig for king-probe, cause lack of upstream tagging mechanism. I'm not > sure if I understand the problem correctly or not? Is the problem related > to the 'zip' word in the 'king-probe_2.13.110909.zip.orig.tar.gz', when the > uscan command is used to download the source and create the orig file? May be I was misleaded by some other package. Uscan does a reasonable job so there is no need for an get-orig-source target. > 4) There is a Lintian warning which I have not any idea how can i resolve > it: > > W: king-probe: hardening-no-relro usr/lib/debian-med/bin/probe > > As mentioned in [1], it seems I need "DEB_BUILD_HARDENING=1". This is default and should not be necessary any more. > Also, some others have mentioned you have not faced into this problem if > you are using "d/compat 9" and "dh_auto_*" rules. I don't know what is > caused this issue? You need to check the Makefile that CFLAGS and LDFLAGS are *really* propagated to the gcc command line. Most upstreams are quite sloppy here. Without testing a patch --- a/Makefile.linux +++ b/Makefile.linux @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ MACHINEFLAGS = -CFLAGS = $(MACHINEFLAGS) +CFLAGS += $(MACHINEFLAGS) LFLAGS = -lm $(MACHINEFLAGS) OBJLIST = dots.o abin.o readPDBrecs.o geom3d.o utility.o select.o \ parse.o atomprops.o stdconntable.o autobondrot.o @@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ OBJLIST = dots.o abin.o readPDBrecs.o geom3d.o utility.o select.o \ cc -c $*.c $(CFLAGS) probe: probe.o $(OBJLIST) - cc -o $@ probe.o $(OBJLIST) $(LFLAGS) + cc -o $@ probe.o $(OBJLIST) $(LFLAGS) $(LDFLAGS) clean: @rm -f *.o *.ckp Please try and check your build log file whether the relro option is propagated. Kind regards Andreas. > [1]. > https://wiki.debian.org/Hardening#DEB_BUILD_HARDENING_RELRO_.28ld_-z_relro.29 > -- http://fam-tille.de
