Bug#606128: Debian package for PGF 2.10
Hi Faheem 2011/3/4 Faheem Mitha fah...@email.unc.edu: I'm not entirely clear what to do with your comments below. Should I work on this package some more and upload it somewhere? Should I file bugs against the Debian package? Something else? I would convey your changes to Makoto. I'm sure he's willing to add your changes to his development tree and upload them in the next release. Adding an extra target in the debian/rules to automatically download and package the version would improve the quality of the PGF package. Whenever the upstream package releases something new, it's easy for both the maintainer and regular users to retrieve the latest upstream package and start working on it. On Mon, 28 Feb 2011, Danai SAE-HAN (韓達耐) wrote: 2011/2/27 Faheem Mitha fah...@email.unc.edu: If you build the package with something like a get-orig-source target, then you will always have this issue. You can add a chmod -x in the debian/rules, and later on ask upstream to remove the executable bit. Ok. Just stick a chmod -x filename in the rules file? That would solve the problem, indeed. Meanwhile, ask upstream to remove the executable bit on their source. In the next upstream release you won't have to insert the chmod -x anymore. You could add some attributes like how thorough and beautifully written the documentation is. That's one of the first things that impressed me when I looked at PGF and TikZ. Most documents are boring and technical, but this guide has a nice introduction, large reference material, etc. Add something that compels end users to download the manual. It's true. The TikZ/PGF is most excellent, and PGF represents an improbable amount of high quality work. How about Document: pgf Title: User s Guide to the PGF Package, Version No genitive s . Just User guide to the PGF package Author: Till Tantau tan...@cs.tu-berlin.de Abstract: This is a comprehensive and high quality manual for PGF and TikZ, including several tutorials and a detailed reference. It discusses both the more accessible frontend subsystems such as TikZ, and more low-level and powerful functionality that may not be needed by the average user. Section: Text (With feedback from http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/41/tex-latex-and-friends) Looks fine to me! However texdoctk pgf does not work. Running just texdoctk and then searching for pgf brings up a window, but when I click on it I get an error. So I must have done something wrong here. I believe there was a discussion a long time ago about the differences between texdoc and texdoctk. texdoc is the one used by TeX Live; I don't know if texdoctk is still actively maintained, but was used with teTeX. Try texdoc -s pgf to get some results in a terminal. Yes, texdoc works as you described. Is texdoctk supposed to work or not? I don't think so. It's just there for legacy reasons, I suppose. Cheers -- Danai -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#606128: Debian package for PGF 2.10
On Sat, 5 Mar 2011, Danai SAE-HAN (韓達耐) wrote: Hi Faheem 2011/3/4 Faheem Mitha fah...@email.unc.edu: I'm not entirely clear what to do with your comments below. Should I work on this package some more and upload it somewhere? Should I file bugs against the Debian package? Something else? I would convey your changes to Makoto. I'm sure he's willing to add your changes to his development tree and upload them in the next release. Should this be a wishlist bug? Adding an extra target in the debian/rules to automatically download and package the version would improve the quality of the PGF package. Whenever the upstream package releases something new, it's easy for both the maintainer and regular users to retrieve the latest upstream package and start working on it. That sounds interesting. Can you point me to some documentation for this? Regards, Faheem
Bug#606128: Debian package for PGF 2.10
Hi Faheem 2011/3/6 Faheem Mitha fah...@email.unc.edu: On Sat, 5 Mar 2011, Danai SAE-HAN (韓達耐) wrote: 2011/3/4 Faheem Mitha fah...@email.unc.edu: I'm not entirely clear what to do with your comments below. Should I work on this package some more and upload it somewhere? Should I file bugs against the Debian package? Something else? I would convey your changes to Makoto. I'm sure he's willing to add your changes to his development tree and upload them in the next release. Should this be a wishlist bug? That would be best, so that your request gets tracked into the system. And wishlist bug reports are a handy TODO list for the package maintainer. Adding an extra target in the debian/rules to automatically download and package the version would improve the quality of the PGF package. Whenever the upstream package releases something new, it's easy for both the maintainer and regular users to retrieve the latest upstream package and start working on it. That sounds interesting. Can you point me to some documentation for this? Have a look at the Debian Policy: http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-source.html It is totally optional, but I find it very useful, e.g for the cjk package. You can easily update the package and get the latest CVS, SVN, GIT, etc. version and upload it to Debian. Best regards -- Danai -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#606128: Debian package for PGF 2.10
On Sun, 6 Mar 2011, Danai SAE-HAN (韓達耐) wrote: Hi Faheem 2011/3/6 Faheem Mitha fah...@email.unc.edu: On Sat, 5 Mar 2011, Danai SAE-HAN (韓達耐) wrote: 2011/3/4 Faheem Mitha fah...@email.unc.edu: I'm not entirely clear what to do with your comments below. Should I work on this package some more and upload it somewhere? Should I file bugs against the Debian package? Something else? I would convey your changes to Makoto. I'm sure he's willing to add your changes to his development tree and upload them in the next release. Should this be a wishlist bug? That would be best, so that your request gets tracked into the system. And wishlist bug reports are a handy TODO list for the package maintainer. Ok. I'll do that. Adding an extra target in the debian/rules to automatically download and package the version would improve the quality of the PGF package. Whenever the upstream package releases something new, it's easy for both the maintainer and regular users to retrieve the latest upstream package and start working on it. That sounds interesting. Can you point me to some documentation for this? Have a look at the Debian Policy: http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-source.html It is totally optional, but I find it very useful, e.g for the cjk package. You can easily update the package and get the latest CVS, SVN, GIT, etc. version and upload it to Debian. Thanks for the pointer. Regards, Faheem
Bug#606128: Debian package for PGF 2.10
Hi Danai, Thanks for the helpful comments. I just posted some remarks on building the 2.10 PGF package to tex.sx. I'm also ccing the Debian wishlist bug on 2.10. http://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/2044/how-to-install-a-current-version-of-tikz/12589#12589 I'm not entirely clear what to do with your comments below. Should I work on this package some more and upload it somewhere? Should I file bugs against the Debian package? Something else? More comments below. On Mon, 28 Feb 2011, Danai SAE-HAN (韓達耐) wrote: Hi Faheem 2011/2/27 Faheem Mitha fah...@email.unc.edu: Ohura-san is planning an update, yes. See http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=606128 I see. Actually, I just built the package with a few minor changes to the 2.0 Debian packaging. Lintian reports the following errors/warnings. faheem@orwell:/usr/local/src/pgf$ lintian pgf_2.10-0_all.deb E: pgf: debian-revision-should-not-be-zero 2.10-0 W: pgf: doc-base-abstract-field-is-template pgf:6 W: pgf: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/texmf/tex/generic/pgf/math/pgfmathutil.code.tex W: pgf: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/texmf/tex/generic/pgf/math/pgfmathcalc.code.tex W: pgf: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/texmf/tex/generic/pgf/math/pgfmathparser.code.tex W: pgf: maintainer-script-empty preinst W: pgf: command-with-path-in-maintainer-script postinst:24 /usr/bin/mktexlsr W: pgf: maintainer-script-empty prerm W: pgf: command-with-path-in-maintainer-script postrm:25 /usr/bin/mktexlsr 2) The executable-not-elf-or-script presumably mean that these files shouldn't be executable? It is true that these three files under that directory are executable, but the rest aren't. Probably an unstream issue. If you build the package with something like a get-orig-source target, then you will always have this issue. You can add a chmod -x in the debian/rules, and later on ask upstream to remove the executable bit. Ok. Just stick a chmod -x filename in the rules file? 3) debian-revision-should-not-be-zero refers to http://lintian.debian.org/tags/doc-base-abstract-field-is-template.html You mean doc-base-abstract-field-is-template I presume. Yes. Sorry. I guess this refers to /usr/share/doc-base/pgf and specifically the description field. Ie. Document: pgf Title: User s Guide to the PGF Package, Version Author: Till Tantau tan...@cs.tu-berlin.de Abstract: This manual describes what pgf is and how it can be used to manage online manuals on Debian systems. That is indeed the default text and should be changed. Possibly the Title should be User's Guide to the PGF Package, Version 2.10 and the Abstract something like Abstract: Guide for usage of PGF and TikZ. Not sure what one should say here. You could add some attributes like how thorough and beautifully written the documentation is. That's one of the first things that impressed me when I looked at PGF and TikZ. Most documents are boring and technical, but this guide has a nice introduction, large reference material, etc. Add something that compels end users to download the manual. It's true. The TikZ/PGF is most excellent, and PGF represents an improbable amount of high quality work. How about Document: pgf Title: User s Guide to the PGF Package, Version Author: Till Tantau tan...@cs.tu-berlin.de Abstract: This is a comprehensive and high quality manual for PGF and TikZ, including several tutorials and a detailed reference. It discusses both the more accessible frontend subsystems such as TikZ, and more low-level and powerful functionality that may not be needed by the average user. Section: Text (With feedback from http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/41/tex-latex-and-friends) 4) maintainer-script-empty preinst (ditto for prerm) refers to http://lintian.debian.org/tags/maintainer-script-empty.html So preinst and prerm should be removed? Yes. Ok. 5) command-with-path-in-maintainer-script? This refers to http://lintian.debian.org/tags/command-with-path-in-maintainer-script.html. Should one just use mktexlsr then? Definitely. Sometimes you would want to have your own mktexlsr and therefore change the $PATH variable. Ok. I tried using the package and it seems to work ok. Nice. However texdoctk pgf does not work. Running just texdoctk and then searching for pgf brings up a window, but when I click on it I get an error. So I must have done something wrong here. I believe there was a discussion a long time ago about the differences between texdoc and texdoctk. texdoc is the one used by TeX Live; I don't know if texdoctk is still actively maintained, but was used with teTeX. Try texdoc -s pgf to get some results in a terminal. Yes, texdoc works as you described. Is texdoctk supposed to work or not? Regards, Faheem
