Re: How to handle marked for removal
Hello Loren, you can wait till the package cimg-dev is fixed. you can contact the maintainer if (s)he needs help to fix it. Kind regards Mechtilde Am 03.03.24 um 07:29 schrieb Loren M. Lang: Hello Mentors, I was notified that a package of mine is now marked for removal in testing due to the time_t change. This seems to be with packages that are indirect build dependencies. I don't see anything in my own package that uses time_t or date/time operations. I just want to know what my responsibility is for maintaining my package through this. As it does not seem to be my direct build dependency, I'm not sure if I even need to consider rebuilding anything. My specific package is tiv which has a build-dep on cimg-dev and it seems somewhere down the line it has this: 1062125: gimp: NMU diff for 64-bit time_t transition https://bugs.debian.org/1062125 1063178: nifticlib: NMU diff for 64-bit time_t transition https://bugs.debian.org/1063178 Do I need to respond or just wait it out? Thanks -- Mechtilde Stehmann ## Debian Developer ## PGP encryption welcome ## F0E3 7F3D C87A 4998 2899 39E7 F287 7BBA 141A AD7F OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Maintaining a Package as a Non-Software Developer
Hello Charalampos, hello Zach, I want to be part of the team, too. I'm working on a documentation about the packaging process. I'm interested to improve the documentation. Regards Mechtilde Am 28.02.24 um 15:10 schrieb Charalampos Mitrodimas: Hi Zack, On 2/28/24 07:28, earache_curtsy...@simplelogin.com wrote: Hello Debian Mentors, I am a sysadmin who manages dozens of Debian servers. I also use Debian for my personal computing. I am very thankful to the Debian project and would love to give back to it somehow. I was thinking that maintaining one or more packages would be a great way to do this. I know a bit of Java and C but do not write code on a regular basis (other than bash scripts). I am asking for a sanity check on whether or not this is a good idea, or if the work of maintaining a package is only plausible for highly skilled software engineers. From, Zach I'm an engineer and a Debian user, and I also maintain several servers running Debian. Additionally, I'm interested in becoming a maintainer. Would you be interested in forming a sort of team? I can assist with coding, especially in addressing upstream bugs. Of course, I'm not entirely sure if this is feasible. Mentors could provide us with clarification on this matter. However, if you're interested, please let me know. Charalampos -- Mechtilde Stehmann ## Debian Developer ## PGP encryption welcome ## F0E3 7F3D C87A 4998 2899 39E7 F287 7BBA 141A AD7F OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: build for stable: bad-distribution-in-changes-file
Hello Lorenzo, How did you define your verrsion? Can you please post the Header of your *.changes file Kind regards Mechtilde Am 09.09.23 um 09:17 schrieb Lorenzo: Hello mentors, I want to build a package to upload to stable, but I get a lintian Error E: runit-services changes: bad-distribution-in-changes-file bookworm I'm doing the following steps 1. generate the changelog entry with $ dch --stable https://salsa.debian.org/Lorenzo.ru.g-guest/runit-services/-/commit/50308e04023c4b6de0d795aa2e12504882e9861c 2. create the stable chroot with # sbuild-createchroot --include=eatmydata,ccache,gnupg bookworm /path/to/bookworm-amd64-sbuild 3. build from the package source with $ sbuild --dist=bookworm and at the end of the build I see the lintian error, what I'm doing wrong? Lorenzo
Re: Creating packages for several distributions
Hello Robin, Where do you have the sources? You can only upload source packages into the Debian repositorium. And I think you need a sponsor to upload it Regards Mechtilde Am 22.03.23 um 16:40 schrieb Robin ALEXANDER: debian/bullseye would be the name of the branch in my git repository and it would target the bullseye-backports distribution Le mercredi 22 mars 2023 à 16:11 +0100, Andrey Rakhmatullin a écrit : On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 02:42:28PM +0100, Robin Alexander wrote: * debian/bullseye: debian official repository and bullseye Not sure what is this? Do you mean bullseye-backports?
Re: Creating packages for several distributions
Hello Robin, You can create a package for unstable and upload it to mentors.debian.net. There you find a description how to start. You find also more documentation under https://www.debian.org/devel/join/ It is not possible to upload directly to bullseye (stable) First you have to prepare an upload for unstable which have to go through the new queue. As we now are in freeze no new package will migrate to testing. After the release and migrating to testing it can be possible to do an backports. Am 22.03.23 um 13:48 schrieb Robin Alexander: Hi, I am in charge of creating debian packages for the Opendigitalradio mmbtools (https://www.opendigitalradio.org/mmbtools) and as such, I: - am proposing/pushing debian packages to unstable - manage the Opendigitalradio debian repository (http://debian.opendigitalradio.org) If I want to create a package (ex: odr-audioenc) for both unstable and bullseye on both debian and odr repository, can I have 1 debian/changelog file only where the first line would read: odr-audioenc (3.3.1-1+deb11u1) unstable bullseye; urgency=medium or do I need 2 versions of debian/changelog (thus 2 branches: debian/bullseye + debian/latest): one for each distribution (unstable and bullseye)? Thank you for your help. --- Robin ALEXANDER -- Mechtilde Stehmann
Re: gbp import-orig: how to choose compression (xz)
Hello Lorenzo, please use a special gbp.conf. More information you can get in the manpage of gbp.conf Regards MEchtilde Am 27.01.23 um 18:02 schrieb Lorenzo: Hello mentors, I want to import a new svn snapshot to update a Debian package, the salsa git repo is already configured for gbp, so I did $ gbp import-orig -u1.5+svn38408 ../upstreamsvn/mplayer upstream/mplayer is a directory with the unpacked svn checkout. Gbp creates a ../upstreamsvn/mplayer_1.5+svn38408.orig.tar.gz archieve (not a tar.xz); it also uses tar.gz in the pristine-tar branch. One problem with the tar.gz is that debian/gbp.conf has compression = xz so when I push to salsa the salsa-ci fails because it searches for a tar.xz archieve gbp:info: All Orig tarballs 'mplayer_1.5+svn38408.orig.tar.xz' found at '/builds/Lorenzo.ru.g-guest/mplayer/debian/output' gbp:info: Creating /builds/Lorenzo.ru.g-guest/mplayer/debian/output/mplayer_1.5+svn38408.orig.tar.xz gbp:error: Error creating mplayer_1.5+svn38408.orig.tar.xz: Pristine-tar couldn't checkout "mplayer_1.5+svn38408.orig.tar.xz": fatal: path 'mplayer_1.5+svn38408.orig.tar.xz.delta' does not exist in 'refs/heads/pristine-tar' pristine-tar: git show refs/heads/pristine-tar:mplayer_1.5+svn38408.orig.tar.xz.delta failed pristine-tar: successfully generated ../mplayer_1.5+svn38408.orig.tar.gz gbp:info: Disabling 'cleaner' hook gbp:info: Extracting 'mplayer_1.5+svn38408.orig.tar.xz' to '/builds/Lorenzo.ru.g-guest/mplayer/debian/output/mplayer-tmp' tar: /builds/Lorenzo.ru.g-guest/mplayer/debian/output/mplayer_1.5+svn38408.orig.tar.xz: Cannot open: No such file or directory tar: Error is not recoverable: exiting now gbp:error: Couldn't unpack '/builds/Lorenzo.ru.g-guest/mplayer/debian/output/mplayer_1.5+svn38408.orig.tar.xz': it exited with 2 Is there a way to tell gbp import-orig to use xz compression? Lorenzo -- Mechtilde Stehmann ## Debian Developer ## PGP encryption welcome ## F0E3 7F3D C87A 4998 2899 39E7 F287 7BBA 141A AD7F
Re: Question with packaging for non-free
Hello Hunter Am 21.05.21 um 08:51 schrieb Hunter Wittenborn: > Hello, > > I've recently been working on a project called > https://github.com/hwittenborn/makedeb that converts Arch Linux > packages into Debian packages. More specifically, it takes the Arch > Linux build format, PKGBUILDs, and uses them to make Debian > packages. > > As of recent, I've been wanting to package it for the Debian > repositories, but makedeb itself only makes binary packages (makedeb > is also self-building). Do you want to have the package "makedeb" in the Debian Repo? If yes, then try to build it from its source. Then it can be published in main > As a result of that, I've decided that the best course of action > would be to publish it to the > https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-archive#s-non-free, but I > haven't been able to find where I would start for that. I've looked > at the https://mentors.debian.net/intro-maintainers/ page, but it > looked like the guide was written up for people creating source > packages. > > Is there anywhere I should look at, or anyone I should contact? > Kind regards -- Mechtilde Stehmann ## Debian Developer ## PGP encryption welcome ## F0E3 7F3D C87A 4998 2899 39E7 F287 7BBA 141A AD7F OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Location for user installed plugin libraries and icons
Hello Jon, do you have a special plugin in mind. I packaged several plugins for thunderbird and libreoffice. They all are installed as root under /usr/lib and/or /usr/share. Some of them has also config files. So I offer we can work step-by-step to the packaging process. Kind regards Mechtilde Am 07.05.21 um 02:58 schrieb Jon Gough: > The user install plugins can vary between very simple with a config file > and a couple of icons up to complex with large data >1GB and hundreds of > icons. > > So, if debs must not touch files in $HOME but is allowed to create files > there (is that not a contradiction?) where else could the 'system' files > be placed? > > Is there a process that allows the deb to 'clean up' the application > when the application is uninstalled, in particular any 'install' > artefacts that have been installed by plugins? Debs will identify > dependencies that are no longer required when they are uninstalled and > the system package manger will allow automatic uninstall of unused items > if the user wants. > > The use of .local and .config is not an issue when installing, but it is > during the un-install process that the issue arises. My experience of > users is that they know little of the file system and only really > recognise 'Documents', 'Downloads' and 'Desktop' as being places where > things are stored. I know of users who upgrade phones/tablets/PC's > because they become 'slow' due to left over items filling all available > disk space. I am hoping to be a little more user friendly than that. The > whole purpose of the plugin manager is to allow users to extend the > capabilities of the application without having to worry about the 'deb' > install processes. > > Most of the instances of the program will be installed for use on > 'single user' or 'single user account' machines. The cases where a > machine is 'multi user' will likely be developers or being 'managed' by > ICT people so that will not be an issue. In normal user cases they will > use a package manager to uninstall the package and will not go near a > command prompt. > > Jon > -- Mechtilde Stehmann ## Debian Developer ## PGP encryption welcome ## F0E3 7F3D C87A 4998 2899 39E7 F287 7BBA 141A AD7F OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Easier package building program
Hello Am 20.04.21 um 14:52 schrieb Aoki, Osamu: > HI, > > On Sun, 2021-04-18 at 07:56 +0200, Mechtilde wrote: >> Hello Jeremy, >> >> I already try to do so. >> >> I'm writing a shell script to automate the build process as far as possible. >> >> And I'm documenting it literally. >> >> I do it in German and it is prepared for translation. >> >> Source: https://salsa.debian.org/ddp-team/dpb >> >> Book: https://people.debian.org/~mechtilde/Dokumentatio >> Cooperation is welcome. > > Looks interesting. > > Have you thought about improving existing ones. > > https://www.debian.org/doc/devel-manuals#debmake-doc > > or even its previous version. > > https://www.debian.org/doc/devel-manuals#maint-guide Yes, but I can't do it. My starting point was my try to automate the packaging process. I tried do document all those steps which I find out by try and error, reading many documents from different sources and try and error again. > They already come with translations. > > Very verbose documentation doesn't help much since we are working on > the moving target. > > Biggest shortcomings are: > > They don't use the current sbuild. > They are not updated on time. As long as I haven't any idea ow sbuild works and/or what are the different and how it changes the part I described, I can't describe it. > > I think gbp will stay here but the use of dgit will increase. For the > chroot build system, there is not much reason not to use sbuild. > > After all, it share the same build system as the official buildd. > It uses overlay mount and it is supported by kernel for good long time > and we can use any filesystem. (NO LVM or Btrfs required.) (Except "I > don't like Perl" like me. Well, I even had to work on uscan in Perl to > be useful to others.) > > https://wiki.debian.org/sbuild > > I will change https://www.debian.org/doc/devel-manuals#debmake-doc > to use sbuild after bullseye. > https://salsa.debian.org/debian/debmake-doc/-/tree/sbuild > > It is non-trivial to do piupitus and autopkgtest with > pbuilder/cowbuilder. gbp can be used with sbuild now. > > apt-cache-ng has some issue for deb.debian.org in its chroot apt line > but I think that can be adddressed ... > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=986356 My goal is to help people to understand why packaging for a distribution and here esp for Debian is important and very interesting. > > Regards, > > Osamu > > Kind regards -- Mechtilde Stehmann ## Debian Developer ## PGP encryption welcome ## F0E3 7F3D C87A 4998 2899 39E7 F287 7BBA 141A AD7F OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#978440: RFS: paperwork/2.0.2-1 -- Personal document manager
Hello Leopold, hello all, does it also build at buildd after a source only upload. At the official build machines it is n't allowed to install a package which isn't called in debian/control beside the essential build packages. You have to call *all needed* packages for building in debian/control. Otherwise it can't be build at the official build machines. This should be ensured by pbuilder. You have to be able to build in a clean pbuilder chroot. Kind regards Mechtilde Am 14.02.21 um 14:15 schrieb Leopold Palomo-Avellaneda: > Mechtilde, > > > El 14/2/21 a les 14:04, Mechtilde Stehmann ha escrit: > > [...] > >> dh clean --with python3,sphinxdoc --buildsystem=pybuild >> dh: error: unable to load addon sphinxdoc: Can't locate >> Debian/Debhelper/Sequence/sphinxdoc.pm in @INC (you may need to install >> the Debian::Debhelper::Sequence::sphinxdoc module) (@INC contains: >> /etc/perl /usr/local/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/perl/5.32.1 >> /usr/local/share/perl/5.32.1 /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/perl5/5.32 >> /usr/share/perl5 /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/perl-base >> /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/perl/5.32 /usr/share/perl/5.32 >> /usr/local/lib/site_perl) at (eval 14) line 1. >> BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at (eval 14) line 1. > > [...] > > > IMHO the problem that you have here is that you have not installed in > the box where you run pbuilder or gbp the package sphinx-common. > > That package contains the file > sphinx-common: /usr/share/perl5/Debian/Debhelper/Sequence/sphinxdoc.pm > > that needs Debhelper to prepare the package to be built. > > I have backported paperwork without any problem. > > Best regards, > > Leopold > -- Mechtilde Stehmann ## Debian Developer ## PGP encryption welcome ## F0E3 7F3D C87A 4998 2899 39E7 F287 7BBA 141A AD7F OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#978440: RFS: paperwork/2.0.2-1 -- Personal document manager
Hello Thomas, This is the diff i did: diff --git a/debian/rules b/debian/rules index 14222e7..a4cacc2 100755 --- a/debian/rules +++ b/debian/rules @@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ debian/paperwork-gtk.install: debian/paperwork-gtk.install.in %: - dh $@ --with python3,sphinxdoc --buildsystem=pybuild + dh $@ --with python3 --buildsystem=pybuild Without this patch I get the following message after applying the patches and before looking and downloading the dependencies. dh clean --with python3,sphinxdoc --buildsystem=pybuild dh: error: unable to load addon sphinxdoc: Can't locate Debian/Debhelper/Sequence/sphinxdoc.pm in @INC (you may need to install the Debian::Debhelper::Sequence::sphinxdoc module) (@INC contains: /etc/perl /usr/local/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/perl/5.32.1 /usr/local/share/perl/5.32.1 /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/perl5/5.32 /usr/share/perl5 /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/perl-base /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/perl/5.32 /usr/share/perl/5.32 /usr/local/lib/site_perl) at (eval 14) line 1. BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at (eval 14) line 1. make: *** [debian/rules:38: clean] Error 25 gbp:error: 'git-pbuilder' failed: it exited with 2 Kind regards Mechtilde Am 14.02.21 um 12:50 schrieb Thomas Perret: >> >> I build it in a pbuilder chroot. So all dependencies defined in >> debian/control are installed. >> > > Hi Mechtilde, > > It's weird, I'm also building it in a pbuilder chroot (using > git-buildpackage) and I also tried building with sbuild and everything > went well. > Can you provide the build errors you get? > > Best regards, > Thomas -- Mechtilde Stehmann ## Debian Developer ## PGP encryption welcome ## F0E3 7F3D C87A 4998 2899 39E7 F287 7BBA 141A AD7F OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#978440: RFS: paperwork/2.0.2-1 -- Personal document manager
Hello Thomas, I build it in a pbuilder chroot. So all dependencies defined in debian/control are installed. Regards Mechtilde Am 12.02.21 um 20:48 schrieb Thomas Perret: > Hi, > > Sorry I only checked (and answered) to your comment on mentors.d.n. I > just saw now you left the same message here. > > First, thanks for reviewing my package. > > The sphinxdoc debhelper extension[1] helps to install documentation > build with sphinx (python3-sphinx package). > Can you check you installed all build dependencies, especially > python3-sphinx which depends on sphinx-common which itself provides the > dh_sphinxdoc command? > > Well, I guess that now Bullseye soft freeze is gone, it's less urgent > matter. > > Best regards, > Thomas > > [1]: > https://manpages.debian.org/buster/sphinx-common/dh_sphinxdoc.1.en.html -- Mechtilde Stehmann ## Debian Developer ## PGP encryption welcome ## F0E3 7F3D C87A 4998 2899 39E7 F287 7BBA 141A AD7F OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#978440: RFS: paperwork/2.0.2-1 -- Personal document manager
Hello, I can't build it as a clone from salsa with rules (2020-10-25). I don't understand what you want with "spinxdoc in line 38. If I use debian/rules without it. I can build it. You can find this comment also at mentors.debian.net Kind regards -- Mechtilde Stehmann ## Debian Developer ## PGP encryption welcome ## F0E3 7F3D C87A 4998 2899 39E7 F287 7BBA 141A AD7F OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Strange problem with uscan
Hello, sometimes uscan is unable to download upstream sources and failed: Example: ... uscan info: Matching target for downloadurlmangle: https://github.com/FasterXML/jackson-core/archive/jackson-core-2.12.0.tar.gz uscan info: Upstream URL(+tag) to download is identified as https://github.com/FasterXML/jackson-core/archive/jackson-core-2.12.0.tar.gz uscan info: Matching target for filenamemangle: https://github.com/FasterXML/jackson-core/archive/jackson-core-2.12.0.tar.gz uscan info: Filename (filenamemangled) for downloaded file: https://github.com/FasterXML/jackson-core/archive/jackson-core-2.12.0.tar.gz uscan: Newest version of jackson-core on remote site is 2.12.0, local version is 2.11.3 uscan: => Newer package available from: => https://github.com/FasterXML/jackson-core/archive/jackson-core-2.12.0.tar.gz uscan info: Downloading upstream package: https://github.com/FasterXML/jackson-core/archive/jackson-core-2.12.0.tar.gz uscan info: Requesting URL: https://github.com/FasterXML/jackson-core/archive/jackson-core-2.12.0.tar.gz uscan info: Successfully downloaded package: https://github.com/FasterXML/jackson-core/archive/jackson-core-2.12.0.tar.gz uscan info: Start checking for common possible upstream OpenPGP signature files uscan info: End checking for common possible upstream OpenPGP signature files uscan info: Missing OpenPGP signature. uscan info: New orig.tar.* tarball version (oversionmangled): 2.12.0 uscan info: Launch mk-origtargz with options: --package jackson-core --version 2.12.0 --compression default --directory .. --copyright-file debian/copyright ../https://github.com/FasterXML/jackson-core/archive/jackson-core-2.12.0.tar.gz uscan error: Could not read ../https://github.com/FasterXML/jackson-core/archive/jackson-core-2.12.0.tar.gz: No such file or directory This happens only when I have name and version number like jackson-core-2.12.0 What is wrong here? This is my watch file: version=4 opts=\ uversionmangle=s/-alpha/~alpha/;s/-Beta/~beta/;s/-rc/~rc/;s/PRE/~pre/,\ filenamemangle=s/.+\/v?(\d\S+)\.*/$1/ \ https://github.com/FasterXML/jackson-core/releases .*jackson-core- v?(\d\S+)\.tar\.gz Kind regards -- Mechtilde Stehmann ## Debian Developer ## PGP encryption welcome ## F0E3 7F3D C87A 4998 2899 39E7 F287 7BBA 141A AD7F OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Creating a proper d/watch file
Hello I want to improve my /watch files. I want to do it for the package jbig2-imageio The source code is at https://pdfbox.apache.org/download.cgi and the download link is https://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua?filename=pdfbox/jbig2-imageio/3.0.3/jbig2-imageio-3.0.3-src.zip=download My last try for a watch file is version=4 opts=\ filenamemangle=s/.*=(.*)/$1/ \ https://pdfbox.apache.org/download.cgi .*/jbig2-imageio-(\d(\.\d)*)-src\.zip=download Can someone show me whrer I'm wrong? Kind regards -- Mechtilde Stehmann ## Debian Developer ## PGP encryption welcome ## F0E3 7F3D C87A 4998 2899 39E7 F287 7BBA 141A AD7F signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: About sponsorship
Hello, maybe a hint for help Is it a package to be team-amintained? Then ask at the team too Regards Am 08.09.20 um 07:39 schrieb Thomas Dettbarn: > Yes, the process is highly frustrating. > Hang in there, buddy! > > Thomas > >> Francisco M Neto hat am 08.09.2020 03:31 geschrieben: >> >> >> Greetings, >> >> I see a lot of RFS email that just sits there in the mailing list, >> without ever getting a response... is that normal? Do responses about >> requests >> for sponsorship usually not get sent to debian-mentors? >> >> Is there something I should be doing to get someone to sponsor my >> package? >> >> >> -- >> []'s, >> >> Francisco M Neto >> www.fmneto.com >> >> 3E58 1655 9A3D 5D78 9F90 >> CFF1 D30B 1694 D692 FBF0 > -- Mechtilde Stehmann ## Debian Developer ## PGP encryption welcome ## F0E3 7F3D C87A 4998 2899 39E7 F287 7BBA 141A AD7F signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Repacking and its documentation
Hello, Am 17.08.19 um 18:04 schrieb Andrey Rahmatullin: > On Sat, Aug 17, 2019 at 04:27:10PM +0200, Mechtilde Stehmann wrote: >> https://wiki.debian.org/Repackaging > The common term for this is "repacking", not "repackaging". > Repackaging sounds like something related to packaging. Now the wiki page is https://wiki.debian.org/Repacking Also I found this description of the suffix for repacking https://wiki.debian.org/Javascript/Repacking#A1._Choose_a_repack_suffix We should describe this in the new-maint-guide and/or in the developer reference or but a link into it. Kind regards -- Mechtilde Stehmann ## Debian Developer ## PGP encryption welcome ## F0E3 7F3D C87A 4998 2899 39E7 F287 7BBA 141A AD7F signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Repackaging and its documentation
Hello, i start with a new package where i have to repackage the source code. The source code include libraries. What is the right naming? I know +dfsg for license reason. but what is the definition for +ds or +repack or something else. I alreada read * [[https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debmake-doc/ch05.en.html#dfsg|debmake-doc]] * [[https://perl-team.pages.debian.net/howto/repacking.html|Perl-Team]] * [[https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/ch06.html#bpp-origtargz|Developer-Reference]] and collect these inforamtion under https://wiki.debian.org/Repackaging Can you give me some examples for good pratice to handle the different suffices? Kind regards -- Mechtilde Stehmann ## Debian Developer ## PGP encryption welcome ## F0E3 7F3D C87A 4998 2899 39E7 F287 7BBA 141A AD7F signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Packing and installing Debian changelog "by hand"
Hello, Am 27.07.19 um 18:50 schrieb Andreas Ronnquist: > On Sat, 27 Jul 2019 20:05:33 +0500, > Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: > >> On Sat, Jul 27, 2019 at 03:30:05PM +0200, Andreas Ronnquist wrote: >>> I have a package which got a menu item to show the upstream >>> changelog - So I want to avoid compressing this, but still compress >>> the Debian changelog. >>> >>> In my attempts I first use override_dh_compress and add -Xchangelog >>> there, with the results that all changelogs are not compressed. >>> (Since this also catches changelog.Debian) >>> >>> Fine, then I simply compress my Debian changelog by hand using gzip >>> -9 >>> - which I have tried in override_dh_install_changelogs like this: >> Call dh_compress on changelog.Debian. >> > > Thanks - > > However - I'm sorry to say it wasn't that simple - I believe I run into > #781131 [1] - I only manage to make all files containing "changelog" to be > compressed, or none of them. Only a view through the crystal ball: You want to hold the upstream changelog uncompressed? then I guess you should overwrite installdocs instead of installchangelog. > > -- Andreas Rönnquist > mailingli...@gusnan.se > andr...@ronnquist.net > > 1: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=781131 > Kind regards -- Mechtilde Stehmann ## Debian Developer ## PGP encryption welcome ## F0E3 7F3D C87A 4998 2899 39E7 F287 7BBA 141A AD7F signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
