¡Hola Rahul! El 2014-10-21 a las 01:26 +0530, Rahul Amaram escribió: > Apologies for the delay. Had been caught up with some work. > Kindly review and upload to Debian.
The review process involves checking and fixing the packaging, and checking upstream code for possible errors/incompatibilities with the way things are done in the distribution. It takes time from both of us. My ultra motive to offer you to review the package is to have more members engaged in the team, not to push things that are not up to the quality expected in Debian. > Version: 0.0~git20140429-1 There are a couple of fixes in the upstream git, last commit is 2014-05-08, you might want to include those. > Maintainer: Rahul Amaram <amaramra...@users.sourceforge.net> To be under the kde team umbrella the package should be something like: Maintainer: Debian/Kubuntu Qt/KDE Maintainers <debian-qt-...@lists.debian.org> or: Maintainer: Debian KDE Extras Team <pkg-kde-ext...@lists.alioth.debian.org> or: Maintainer: Debian Krap Maintainers <debian-qt-...@lists.debian.org> The field: XSBC-Original-Maintainer is not considered valid in Debian packages. Add add yourself to the Uploaders list. In the debian/copyright file: Source: <url://example.com> Please update the template to point to the upstream git repository. Also in the debian/copyright file, the debian/* path is licensed under a more restrictive license than the upstream code (GPL, and LGPL respectively), this kind of licensing could block patches in the debian package from ever be applied upstream and should be avoided. I pinged Rohan about this. In Debian the pam modules are named libpam-$module, please rename the binary package. The description provides almost no information, please extend it. Consider using the kwalletmanager description, and adding a paragraph about the pam module (ala libpam-gnome-keyring). It's a good idea to set the build dependencies versions to (at least) the ones listed in the CMakeLists.txt, in this case cmake (>= 2.8.8) and libgcrypt11-dev (>= 1.5.0). In the code I don't see any obvious errors, but I'm not an expert in pam modules, some comments though: In kwallet_hash, after the call to error = gcry_kdf_derive(..) it's not checking in error returned something. In prompt_for_password, the memset in the lines: struct pam_response *response = NULL; memset (&response, 0, sizeof(response)); is redundant. Also, the normal review process is done via mentors.debian.net, where you could upload the package and send a RFS, I prefer using a git repository where I can see the changes made, and afterwards integrate the changes in a repository for the package, either one is fine, or even an uri where I can fetch the package source (I don't care about the binary file). In any case, I would prefer not to have the packages as attachments, specially in bugs and the team mailing lists, so, unless you can't publish the files somewhere else, please avoid sending them like so. And if you really have to send the files as attachments, please send them via direct mail, without copies. Thanks, -- “There are two ways of constructing a software design. One way is to make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies. And the other way is to make it so complicated that there are no obvious deficiencies." -- C.A.R. Hoare Saludos /\/\ /\ >< `/
Description: Digital signature