Re: Debuild issue
Hi Gregory, On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 04:10:29PM -0800, Gregory Sharp wrote: The source tarball should not contain the Debian revision number. The -1 in the end is the Debian package version which will be increased if there would be a need to change the packaging. Should I just rename the .tar.gz file and go about my business? Yes, definitely. The name should be plastimatch_1.5.15+dfsg.orig.tar.gz Definitely I was misunderstanding this. Now I understand and my problem was easily resolved. But I still have a kind of philosophical question. With change of Debian revision number, couldn't the content of source tarball change? No. If the content of the source tarball changes it is per definition a new upstream tarball and usually you will start with Debian revision number 1 again. For example removing an additional file from upstream. Then you would have different Debian versions, with different source tarballs, but the same filename. The source file name should change by increasing its version number. I also think that if I will sponsor the package I will consider using the enhanced uscan[1] to create the upstream source and allows better compression option. The new uscan looks very promising. I would like to use it. It is now in devscripts - unfortunately the option to choose the compression method is not yet implemented (see #730768). So far I ran into two problems, so I stick with the old method until I can resolve. - In Files-Excluded I have a pattern doc/*.pdf, but one of the files with this pattern did not actually get removed.- I like to run get-orig-source as a shell script on the local file for testing if files are being removed correctly. But uscan seems only to support downloading the tarball from ftp or http. Ahhh - that's a bug which seems to happen due to a space in the name of the PDF in question. I need to track this down. Currently the get-orig-script is written in a way that the downloader / creator of the orig source tarball us using the new uscan feature if it is installed on his machine. So if I download the tarball than it is just used. This is a consequence of the fact that in our SVN workflow the source code is not stored in SVN. It would be different when using Git since there the original tarball is stored as pristine-tar inside the Git repository. For simplicity you can simply care for commiting your packaging code as usual to SVN and ping this list. We will care for an upload. Thanks!! The new plastimatch seems ready. I hope error building on sparc, mips will be resolved. I just uploaded. Thanks for your preparation Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-med-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20131217084214.gc...@an3as.eu
Re: [MoM] ProbABEL packaging
Hi Lennart, On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 12:17:47AM +0100, L.C. Karssen wrote: DEBEXAMPLES:=$(DEBPKGNAME)-examples in the beginning of your rules file and than moving the files around. If you want to check the more general packaging docs the keyword is probably multi binary packages (or something like this - I did not checked). Thanks for these hints. In took me a wile to figure it out, but it turned out to be simple. The main missing piece of information was the when building multiple binary packages the files get installed in d/tmp instead of d/$DEBPKGNAME and then copied during the dh_install phase. Ahh, well this might be a stumbling stone for beginners. The good thing is that you most probably will remember now since you have invested some time in finding it out. ;-) In short and for future reference, this is what I did: - Add a section to d/control - Create d/$DEBPKGNAME.install listing the directories (from d/tmp) that need to go in the main (arch-dependent) package - Create d/$DEBPKGNAME-examples.install listing the directories (from d/tmp) that need to go in the examples package. - Update d/rules; previously my changes were in the override_dh_auto_install section, now they're in the override_dh_install section (changing the path to $DEBPKGNAME-examples where needed) Sounds all very reasonable. I would have been cool if dh_install, in the case of multiple binary packages, would move the files from d/tmp to d/$DEBPKGNAME (etc.) so you can more easily see if you indeed listed everything in the .install files. Do you know if such an option exists? man dh_install /--list-missing /--fail-missing I think with this we are ready for upload, right? Yes, it is ... and thus it was just uploaded. :-) Congratulations! Maybe a final change in d/changelog to replace the UNRELEASED tag? This is what I usually do (and have done) since this seems logical to me. I just commited and tagged. Thanks for your work on this and if we are lucky ftpmaster might process your package in the next two weeks so the MoM package will be available at end of this year. It was a pleasure to work together with you Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-med-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20131217093711.gc2...@an3as.eu
Re: Please be prepared for a move of tasks files for Debian Med from SVN to Git (Was: looking for a review for pycorrfit)
btw, how do I update the tasks page? I was looking for it in debian-med policy and checkout the debian-med tasks from svn, but the link in README seem to be broken: http://blends.alioth.debian.org/blends/ch-sentinel.en.html Hmmm, from what README, did you got this link. The README in the root of debian-med from svn. It definitely needs fixing. The reason are two migration steps. The first one was from SGML to XML in the documentation which changed the file names which was not backed up by some symlinks. The next transition was done from blends.alioth.debian.org to blends.debian.org. While I installed redirects to the new location the old file names of the doc where not regarded. I now just installed symlinks at the old locations so the old links should work again (at least the one you posted above) but all those old READMEs should be fixed in any case. Just let me know if you have any trouble with updating the tasks files. Since you either need to be a DD or a member of the blends team you will perhaps face permission problems. On the other hand: What do you want to change? $ grep pycorrfit * bio:Depends: pycorrfit I see, in that I case I don't need to change anything. So the package is included and the framework will atomatically notice that it migrated from Vcs to NEW queue. Just watch the sentinel page tomorrow. :-) Cool, I didn't know that it works this way! As the subject of this mail says it is planed to move Debian Med tasks files from SVN to Git in the not so far future. I just did the migration for Debian Science and Debian Med will follow in the beginn of next year. I'm just announcing this to enable you to rise your voice if there are strong reasons against this move. I see, thanks for the information. Kind regards Andreas. Best regards, Alex -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-med-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/52b02786.1090...@biotec.tu-dresden.de
Re: Please be prepared for a move of tasks files for Debian Med from SVN to Git (Was: looking for a review for pycorrfit)
Hi Alex, On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 11:29:26AM +0100, Alex Mestiashvili wrote: http://blends.alioth.debian.org/blends/ch-sentinel.en.html Hmmm, from what README, did you got this link. The README in the root of debian-med from svn. Good catch! Changed! $ grep pycorrfit * bio:Depends: pycorrfit I see, in that I case I don't need to change anything. :-) So the package is included and the framework will atomatically notice that it migrated from Vcs to NEW queue. Just watch the sentinel page tomorrow. :-) Cool, I didn't know that it works this way! That's why I'm always trying to advocate to put the binary package names right into the tasks files once a package was pushed into Vcs. This advertises our work and makes the package known even before it is uploaded. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-med-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20131217103702.gf2...@an3as.eu
Re: Debuild issue
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 3:42 AM, Andreas Tille ti...@debian.org wrote: Hi Gregory, On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 04:10:29PM -0800, Gregory Sharp wrote: The source tarball should not contain the Debian revision number. The -1 in the end is the Debian package version which will be increased if there would be a need to change the packaging. Should I just rename the .tar.gz file and go about my business? Yes, definitely. The name should be plastimatch_1.5.15+dfsg.orig.tar.gz Definitely I was misunderstanding this. Now I understand and my problem was easily resolved. But I still have a kind of philosophical question. With change of Debian revision number, couldn't the content of source tarball change? No. If the content of the source tarball changes it is per definition a new upstream tarball and usually you will start with Debian revision number 1 again. For example removing an additional file from upstream. Then you would have different Debian versions, with different source tarballs, but the same filename If you have to repackage upstreams tarball again, e.g. removing a pdf file, then just change the dfsg part to dfsg0, dfsg1, etc.. So you will end up with something like plastimatch_1.5.15+dfsg1.orig.tar.gz -Dominique
Re: Debuild issue
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 08:54:12AM -0500, Dominique Belhachemi wrote: If you have to repackage upstreams tarball again, e.g. removing a pdf file, then just change the dfsg part to dfsg0, dfsg1, etc.. So you will end up with something like plastimatch_1.5.15+dfsg1.orig.tar.gz Well, since I did the first upload I createt the 1.5.15+dfsg.orig.tar.gz manually - and will try to hunt down the uscan bug soon. From now on the source tarball can (and should!) be downloaded via `apt-get source` anyway. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-med-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20131217135630.gl2...@an3as.eu
Processed: tagging as pending bugs that are closed by packages in NEW
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: # Tuesday 17 December 19:03:11 UTC 2013 # Tagging as pending bugs that are closed by packages in NEW # http://ftp-master.debian.org/new.html # # Source package in NEW: a href=http://packages.qa.debian.org/libmbim;libmbim/a tags 728195 + pending Bug #728195 [libmbim-glib-dev] libmbim-glib-dev: arch-dependent files in Multi-Arch: same package Added tag(s) pending. # Source package in NEW: a href=http://packages.qa.debian.org/libmbim;libmbim/a tags 731908 + pending Bug #731908 [libmbim-glib0] libmbim-glib0: new upstream version available: 1.6.0 Added tag(s) pending. # Source package in NEW: probabel tags 732264 + pending Bug #732264 [wnpp] ITP: probabel -- Toolset for Genome-Wide Association Analysis Added tag(s) pending. # Source package in NEW: r-cran-evaluate tags 732364 + pending Bug #732364 [wnpp] ITP: r-cran-evaluate -- GNU R parsing and evaluation tools Added tag(s) pending. # Source package in NEW: nat-rtsp tags 732026 + pending Bug #732026 [wnpp] ITP: nat-rtsp -- Connection tracking and NAT support for RTSP (DKMS) Added tag(s) pending. # Source package in NEW: yorick-ygsl tags 732363 + pending Bug #732363 [wnpp] ITP: yorick-ygsl -- GSL special functions plugin for the Yorick language Added tag(s) pending. # Source package in NEW: jssc tags 731189 + pending Bug #731189 [wnpp] ITP: jssc -- Library for working with serial ports from Java Added tag(s) pending. End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 728195: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=728195 731189: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=731189 731908: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=731908 732026: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=732026 732264: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=732264 732363: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=732363 732364: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=732364 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-med-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/handler.s.c.138730701825268.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
