On Monday 11 December 2006 03:42, Patrick Schönfeld wrote: > * Remove all files from debian/ with .ex ending. They are example files > and if you don't need them, then you should not include them. If you > need them, then rename and edit them and whatever it needs to do further.
I was evaluating the utility of the watch.ex and doc-base.EX files before I deleted them. I am planning on removing watch.ex and possibly using the doc-base.EX to itegrate the documentation. > * debian/rules > * : Remove the unneeded extra line at EOF I like the empty line at the end of a file. It allow me to bring the cursor back to the left at the bottom. > * : I don't know much about your package but is > configure parameter --enable-64bit right? You will not build for 64bit > systems only in debian imho The enable-64bit doesn't enable 64bit archs, it enables 64bit offsets in the files so that they can be over 2GB. > * Personally i would use 'install -d' to create directories while > building and get rid of those .dirs files which do contain standard > directories only Is that somehow better than using the debhelper to do it? The directories are created so that I can load them up with files. > * debian/*.dirs: Seee above rules comment > * debian/copyright: > * According to debian policy 12.5 you *must* "say where the upstream > sources (if any) were obtained" Okay. I have that in my local repository for the next release. Here the text I added to the top of the copyright file. "This package was put together by Warren Turkal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> with sources obtained from the http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/software/netcdf/ site." > * You "should name the original authors of the package and the Debian > maintainer(s) who were involved with its creation" above > * IMO you should mention the ones who previous did packaging "The software was previously packaged for Debian by Karl Sackett, Brian Mays, and others. This package is a complete reengineering of of the packaging to bring the package up to current standards. It is not based on prior packaging except for compatibility of package names." > * The lines at the end of the file seem to be unnecessary removed > * debian/changelog: > * Should contain changelog entries of previous debian versions added in local repository for next release > * Must contain a notice that you are new maintainer done locally > Further notes: > It sounds a bit strange that your package has a version -beta-pre. I'm > not sure if you really want to package a pre-beta (what actually is an > alpha version in my sense). Also i don't like cdbs much. IMO it makes > packages / packages build process unclearly. NetCDF developers are incredibly conservative about releases. The last beta release was on Aug. 16. This is what is packaged. It doesn't have any API regressions that I or my scientists have been able to find. I have scientists running some pretty intense numerical simulations based on these libraries. wt -- Warren Turkal, Research Associate III/Systems Administrator Colorado State University, Dept. of Atmospheric Science
