Non standard tar-ball.
I have a tarball for a gpled library that I was thinking of turning into a package for a shared library. The tarball is non-standard. Instead of one directory containing the name and version number, it just has a src and a doc directory in its root directory. Can such a tarball be used as a pristine source for a debian package? Where would the debian subdirectory be? Thank You -- Paul Elliott 1(512)837-1096 pelli...@blackpatchpanel.com PMB 181, 11900 Metric Blvd Suite J http://www.free.blackpatchpanel.com/pme/ Austin TX 78758-3117 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Non standard tar-ball.
dpkg-source doesn't care what is inside the upstream tarball, it will always unpack to foo-1.2.3/ and the Debian tarball/diff will be unpacked/applied so that foo-1.2.3/debian/ exists. For info about library packaging, check out libpkg-guide but note its two deficiencies: http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer/column/libpkg-guide/libpkg-guide.html Recommends using libfooX-dev (where X is the SONAME/ABI number) instead of libfoo-dev. Doesn't mention anything about symbols files, more info here: http://manpages.debian.net/man/1/dpkg-gensymbols http://wiki.debian.org/UsingSymbolsFiles -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/AANLkTimUzw5iu=rrr7tbntc4whpv2nslr2dpu0ofx...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Non standard tar-ball.
On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 16:49:38 +0800, Paul Wise wrote: [..] For info about library packaging, check out libpkg-guide but note its two deficiencies: http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer/column/libpkg-guide/libpkg-guide.html Recommends using libfooX-dev (where X is the SONAME/ABI number) instead of libfoo-dev. Doesn't mention anything about symbols files, more info here: http://manpages.debian.net/man/1/dpkg-gensymbols http://wiki.debian.org/UsingSymbolsFiles FWIW, there is a NM applicant which is working on updating libpkg-guide, helped by his AM, me and another DD. So libpkg-guide should soon be up-to-date again :) David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Non standard tar-ball.
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 5:00 PM, David Paleino da...@debian.org wrote: FWIW, there is a NM applicant which is working on updating libpkg-guide, helped by his AM, me and another DD. So libpkg-guide should soon be up-to-date again :) Great to hear! I wonder if it should move to the website like maint-guide etc: http://www.debian.org/doc/libpkg-guide/ -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/AANLkTi=dblhog3txzum5hge+3blxx4vy6vvsmvykc...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Non standard tar-ball.
On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 17:05:36 +0800, Paul Wise wrote: On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 5:00 PM, David Paleino da...@debian.org wrote: FWIW, there is a NM applicant which is working on updating libpkg-guide, helped by his AM, me and another DD. So libpkg-guide should soon be up-to-date again :) Great to hear! I wonder if it should move to the website like maint-guide etc: http://www.debian.org/doc/libpkg-guide/ I think yes, that'd be its natural location :) -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: phing (third try)
Nicolas wrote: thanks Benoit for your help. I forgot to update debian/copyright file. All package is released under LGPL (v3) license. OK, it looks like most of the files are LGPL (some don't have a license header though), but now you've removed the names of some of the copyright holders. It would probably have been best to keep the separate sections for the files in ./classes, and simply use LGPL-3 in the License field instead of All rights reserved. I also note that you're still using the GPL version 2 only for your packaging, even though it's incompatible with the (L)GPL-3. You should consider changing it to LGPL-2+. A few more things about the format of the copyright file: - You should used a versioned Format URL in the header; the latest revision is: http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/dep/web/deps/dep5.mdwn?op=filerev=173 - There shouldn't be a blank line between Copyright and Licence in the first license paragraph (line 8). - You should append the version number for licenses that have multiple versions, i.e. LGPL-3 instead of LGPL. Zip archive has been removed from that release so no problem for it. That's good. [...] I allways search for a sponsor. I can't help you there, as I'm not a DD. Cheers, -- Benoît -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110324142419.ga7...@debian.lan
Re: RFS: homebank (updated package)
Dnia 2011-03-20, o godz. 19:47:43 Andrey vorono...@gmail.com napisał(a): I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 4.4-0.1 of my package homebank. It builds these binary packages: homebank - Manage your personal accounts at home homebank-data - Data files for homebank [...] I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Did you try to contact its current maintainer? regards fEnIo -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110324151211.7126b8ef@netart
Re: RFS: homebank (updated package)
Hi Dne Sun, 20 Mar 2011 19:47:43 +0200 Andrey vorono...@gmail.com napsal(a): I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 4.4-0.1 of my package homebank. It builds these binary packages: homebank - Manage your personal accounts at home homebank-data - Data files for homebank The package appears to be lintian clean. The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/h/homebank - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/h/homebank/homebank_4.4-0.1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. What is reason for NMU without closing single bug report on the package? Also NMU is not expected to make such invasive changes as changing source format. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
RFS: pidgin 2.7.11-1~bpo60+1
Hi, I've prepared updated packages for squeeze-backports of pidgin 2.7.11-1~bpo60+1 Source and binary debs can be found on: http://dl.gionn.net/pidgin_2.7.11-1~bpo60+1/ I've also setup a debian repository with the help of reprepro: deb http://deb.gionn.net/ squeeze-backports main Bye. -- Giovanni Toraldo http://gionn.net/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Non standard tar-ball.
On Thursday, March 24, 2011 03:49:38 am Paul Wise wrote: dpkg-source doesn't care what is inside the upstream tarball, it will always unpack to foo-1.2.3/ and the Debian tarball/diff will be unpacked/applied so that foo-1.2.3/debian/ exists. I guess my question is how to create the source package in the first place, so that dpkg-source will have some thing to work with. I look at Debian New Maintainers' Guide Chapter 2 - First steps http://www.debian.org/doc/maint-guide/ch-first.en.html Create a subdirectory under your home directory named debian or deb or anything you find appropriate (e.g. just ~/gentoo would do fine in this case). Place the downloaded archive in it, and extract it (with tar xzf gentoo-0.9.12.tar.gz). This will create a src and doc directory in the same directory as the tarball, there will be no foo-1.2.3 sub directory for me to work with. So in what directory do I do the initial debianization? the dh_make? And how do I make sure that the src and doc directories are inside the directory in which I do the dh-make? It is very confusing! Make sure there are no errors, even some irrelevant ones, because there will most probably be problems unpacking on other people's systems, whose unpacking tools may or may not ignore those anomalies. On your console screen, you should see the following. -- Paul Elliott 1(512)837-1096 pelli...@blackpatchpanel.com PMB 181, 11900 Metric Blvd Suite J http://www.free.blackpatchpanel.com/pme/ Austin TX 78758-3117 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
RFS: micro-inetd (updated package)
Dear mentors, once again I have been drawn into IPv6 support and its deviations. Now I am looking for a sponsor for an improved version 20050629-6 of the package micro-inetd. It has been orphaned and I take the opportunity to fix an old problem with single stacked systems. It builds a single, very small binary package: micro-inetd - simple network service spawner The package is lintian clean. The upload fixes these bugs: 354778, 603106, 603110, 615970, one of which is an ITA. The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/micro-inetd - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/micro-inetd/micro-inetd_20050629-6.dsc A thourough examination would make an excelent reward for a hards days work, I could not resist fixing this ITA immediately. Best regards now, and always, Mats Erik Andersson, DM -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110324212838.ga...@mea.homelinux.org
Re: Non standard tar-ball.
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 2:57 AM, Paul Elliott pelli...@blackpatchpanel.com wrote: I guess my question is how to create the source package in the first place, so that dpkg-source will have some thing to work with. In any case it would probably be better to just fix upstream to use a more standard tarball layout. If it were my role to do that I would use GNU automake to achieve it. I see. I never had to deal with such non-standard tarballs before, but after some experiments I would recommend the following. It will give you foo_1.2.3-1.debian.tar.gz, foo_1.2.3-1.dsc and foo_1.2.3.orig.tar.gz. pabs@chianamo:~/tmp/foo$ mv foo-1.2.3.tar.gz foo_1.2.3.orig.tar.gz pabs@chianamo:~/tmp/foo$ mkdir foo-1.2.3 pabs@chianamo:~/tmp/foo$ cd foo-1.2.3/ pabs@chianamo:~/tmp/foo/foo-1.2.3$ tar xf ../foo_1.2.3.orig.tar.gz pabs@chianamo:~/tmp/foo/foo-1.2.3$ dh_make Type of package: single binary, indep binary, multiple binary, library, kernel module, kernel patch? [s/i/m/l/k/n] s Maintainer name : Paul Wise Email-Address : p...@debian.org Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 07:02:49 +0800 Package Name : foo Version : 1.2.3 License : blank Type of Package : Single Hit enter to confirm: Skipping creating ../foo_1.2.3.orig.tar.gz because it already exists Currently there is no top level Makefile. This may require additional tuning. Done. Please edit the files in the debian/ subdirectory now. You should also check that the foo Makefiles install into $DESTDIR and not in / . pabs@chianamo:~/tmp/foo/foo-1.2.3$ debuild -S -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/AANLkTimafY1EG-m+kwxu44k+Z0Scn=-zefa9r+wcx...@mail.gmail.com
upstream source contains .gif files
My upstream source contains .gif files that are not essential. If I delete these file and never use them, can I use this tarball as my pristine source, or must I resource? Thank You. P.S. there are a lot of complicated rules to create a package. -- Paul Elliott 1(512)837-1096 pelli...@blackpatchpanel.com PMB 181, 11900 Metric Blvd Suite J http://www.free.blackpatchpanel.com/pme/ Austin TX 78758-3117 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: upstream source contains .gif files
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 10:50 AM, Paul Elliott pelli...@blackpatchpanel.com wrote: My upstream source contains .gif files that are not essential. If I delete these file and never use them, can I use this tarball as my pristine source, or must I resource? Unless they are non-free or you are already repacking the tarball, don't bother removing them. If you are already repacking to remove non-free stuff then I think it is acceptable to remove them and use that as your tarball, check this section of the devref for recommendations: http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/best-pkging-practices.html#repackagedorigtargz P.S. there are a lot of complicated rules to create a package. Indeed. You can increase your knowledge of them by reading maint-guide, devref and the policy. There are also other language and area specific policies as well. http://www.debian.org/doc/maint-guide/ http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/ http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/AANLkTinWM19MD=+co=hvqyo8cwtu89n352byqx8by...@mail.gmail.com
Re: upstream source contains .gif files
On Thursday, March 24, 2011 10:00:32 pm Paul Wise wrote: On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 10:50 AM, Paul Elliott pelli...@blackpatchpanel.com wrote: My upstream source contains .gif files that are not essential. If I delete these file and never use them, can I use this tarball as my pristine source, or must I resource? Unless they are non-free or you are already repacking the tarball, don't bother removing them. If you are already repacking to remove non-free stuff then I think it is acceptable to remove them and use that as your tarball, check this section of the devref for recommendations: http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/best-pkging-practices.html#r epackagedorigtargz Never mind, I found out that patent expired Paul Elliott 1(512)837-1096 pelli...@blackpatchpanel.com PMB 181, 11900 Metric Blvd Suite J http://www.free.blackpatchpanel.com/pme/ Austin TX 78758-3117 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: upstream source contains .gif files
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 1:38 PM, Paul Elliott pelli...@blackpatchpanel.com wrote: Never mind, I found out that patent expired Ah, the patent expired so long ago that I completely forgot it existed and didn't put two and two together, sorry! -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/aanlktikggw5duzrcv5+ywk-3mabmoenmi4khlabvs...@mail.gmail.com
