* Thorsten Alteholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [080726 22:18]: > - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/meep > - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable > main > contrib non-free > - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/meep/meep_0.20.2-1.dsc
the files debian/patched/99-nopatch.dpatch.failed and patch-stampT in the .diff.gz seem to be cruft. The same for debian/*.debhelper* All the long descriptions end with an emtpy line ("\n ."). I do not think that makes much sense. As this is also the same for all, I guess you missed the description what those package actually are. The -dev packages only depending >= on the non-dev packages looks quite strange. the left-over patch rules in debian/rules make a bit hard to read. You create debian/meep-mpi.1 but try to clean meep-mpi.1 Implementing the optional build-arch (and an empty build-indep) rules would be nice. Instead of "-mkdir directory", i'd suggest "mkdir -p directory". (and using the same temporary directory for both installs will break if anyone calls debian/rules with -jN for N >> 1). A symbols file for the libraries would be nice. I'm a bit confused debian/rules uses soname 1 and thus should do -plibmeep1, while debian/control lists those with 2. My unstable box is currently down, so the above are just the problems I can catch by looking-at without trying. Also Libraries are generally quite hard, so finding sponsers is relatively hard. Hochachtungsvoll, Bernhard R. Link -- "Never contain programs so few bugs, as when no debugging tools are available!" Niklaus Wirth -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]