> (Please don't CC me, when replying to list mail) Ok, I have just read interesting document: http://catb.org/%7Eesr/faqs/smart-questions.html I have never used mailing lists befor. It's a little bit archaic method of interaction...
>>> It would also be nice if you'd describe how exactly the .orig.tar.bz2 >>> is generated: is it downloaded from the specified location as-is? Is >>> it repackaged in one way or the other? (I suppose so, the debian/ dir >>> is not present in the .orig.tar.gz) >> >> All necessary information available in debian/copyright file: >> https://github.com/tehnick/uhub-debian/blob/master/debian/copyright#L7 >> >> The GitHub has no possibility to make bzip tarballs from git tags >> automatically. So only zip archive and gzip tarballs are available there. > > Yeah, I know how GitHub works, but those two lines don't tell me what > you wrote just above: that it's the same as the tarball from github, > except it's bz2 and debian/ is not included in the orig.tar.gz. > > This is the information I'd like to see in the copyright file, as it > tells me exactly what steps were taken to generate the > tarball. Otherwise I have to guess and double-check, and I'm waaay too > lazy to do that. I really don't understand that do you want. Present information is enough to make own tarball. Or maybe should I cite you in this file? Smth. like that: "It's the same as the tarball from github, except it's bz2 and debian/ is not included in the orig.tar.gz" But this is absolutely the same... >> So .orig.tar.bz2 formed in such way: >> https://github.com/tehnick/deb_packages/blob/master/Debian/uhub/automatic_update_uhub#L77 >> > > This could be included in the package sources, perhaps even worked into > debian/rules get-orig-source. That'd be awesome. Ok, I'll make it. "awesome"? In what sense? >>> I would suggestshipping the directory in the deb with that >>> permission already, and drop the postinst. >> >> This is bad idea: >> W: uhub: non-standard-dir-perm var/log/uhub/ 0750 != 0755 >> N: >> N: The directory has a mode different from 0755, and it's not one of the >> N: known exceptions. >> N: >> N: Refer to Debian Policy Manual section 10.9 (Permissions and owners) for >> N: details. >> N: >> N: Severity: normal, Certainty: possible >> N: >> N: Check: files, Type: binary, udeb > > Note the Certainty: possible. Also, quoting the first two sentences of > the referenced section: > > "The rules in this section are guidelines for general use. If necessary > you may deviate from the details below. " > > I believe that setting /var/lib/uhub to 0750 in the deb, instead of the > postinst is a good enough reason to deviate from the recommendation, and >override the lintian warning. > > On the other hand, there exist packages in the archive that do this in > postinst, so.. whichever way you prefer. I have tried to follow by your recommendations. I have added file uhub.lintian-overrides: https://github.com/tehnick/uhub-debian/blob/master/debian/uhub.lintian-overrides But I still get the same lintian warning. What am I doing wrong? >>>* Other notes >>> >>> Since uhub seems to have the option of being compiled with SSL >>> support, it might be a good idea to enable that, perhaps? >> >> In this stable release SSL support is very experimental on my opinion. >> But in current developing version it is quite good. So I will enable this >> option in the next stable release. > > Fair enough! http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=fair%20enough Hmm, such different meaning... =)
