Re: Wrong permissions
On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 08:11:41AM +, Colin Watson wrote: Eric Van Buggenhaut [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm a DD to be, waiting for the DAM to open my accounts. I want to adopt an orphaned package called crafty, a chess game player. i rebuild a new package since there's a new upstream code. The package installs opening books in /var/lib/crafty. Since the program also "learns" how to play, it regularly updates these opening books. Although I explicitely specified in debian/rules to change the permissions on those files to rw-rw-rw, my files in debian/tmp/var/lib/crafty are still rw-r--r--. Mode 666? Are you really sure? I can't see any justification for that. Perhaps use 664 instead and make the program setgid. I'm not sure I understand. All files belong to group "root", so making the opening books files setgid doesn't help. Maybe I have to create a new group called "chess" and chown root.chess debian/tmp/var/lib/crafty, then add the chessplayers to this group. Any idea ? dh_fixperms is removing the extra write permissions - see its man page. You either need to exclude some files or change their permissions after calling dh_fixperms. This worked fine, ok. A few other nits about the posted debian/rules: rm -rf debian/tmp debian/files* core debian/substvars dh_clean will clean up all of these for you. Changed dh_installdirs [...] cd debian/tmp install -d `cat ../dirs` dh_installdirs should already have done this. Changed install -s crafty debian/tmp/usr/games/crafty.bin A DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=nostrip facility (see policy 4.1) would be nice here. Added too. Cheers, -- Colin Watson [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Eric Van Buggenhaut - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please don't send proprietary format documents, I can't open them. Use instead open-source formats like .txt or .rtf. Dvi, ps or tex files are welcome. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fwd: Message Undeliverable! (Sat, Feb 24, 2001 at 11:58:22AM -0700 eric)
Any idea why this is happening to all my e-mails to this list sincde this morning ? - Forwarded message from [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Envelope-to: eric@localhost From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Message Undeliverable! X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 Feb 2001 18:58:22.0974 (UTC) FILETIME=[C2AAF9E0:01C09E93] Date: 24 Feb 2001 11:58:22 -0700 The email you sent was routed to our server, but there were no recipients at this domain. Please check the address and send the message again. Thanks. Here are the recipients: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - End forwarded message - -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
keeping files from one version to the other.
Hi,
I'm in NM and I have adopted and packaged crafty, a chess engine.
Now, crafty keeps its opening books files in /var/lib/crafty and these files
are updated whenever a new position is played. Crafty 'learns' :-)
My problem is : when upgrading the package, the files in /var/lib/crafty are
overwritten by the original files coming with the new version package. How can
I preserve these files from being overwritten ? The files are normally
installed by debian/rules :
[eric@femto:~/debian/crafty-17.13]$ less debian/rules
[...]
install: build
dh_testdir
dh_testroot
dh_clean -k
dh_installdirs
# Add here commands to install the package into debian/tmp.
install -d debian/tmp
ln -sf ./crafty.6.gz \
debian/tmp/usr/share/man/man6/crafty.bin.6.gz
install -m2755 -o root -g games crafty debian/tmp/usr/games/crafty.bin
install crafty.wrapper debian/tmp/usr/games/crafty
install -m664 -o root -g games books.bin debian/tmp/var/lib/crafty
install -m664 -o root -g games book.{bin,lrn} debian/tmp/var/lib/crafty
install -m664 -o root -g games position.{bin,lrn}
debian/tmp/var/lib/crafty
install debian/doc/crafty.{faq,doc} debian/tmp/usr/share/doc/crafty
install debian/doc/read.me debian/tmp/usr/share/doc/crafty
install -m666 debian/crafty.rc debian/tmp/etc
[...]
Thanks.
--
Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: /etc/ question
On Sun, Feb 25, 2001 at 09:34:19AM +, Julian Gilbey wrote: On Sun, Feb 25, 2001 at 05:15:37AM +0100, Eric Van Buggenhaut wrote: Remember to correctly unwind, moving the conffile back to its original place (as long as the original file does not exist) in the abort-install and abort-upgrade targets of preinst, postrm and postinst. [never tried this, but that seems to be what's needed from the not-so-clear policy chapter 6] In the package I maintain, called crafty, I moved /etc/craftyrc to /etc/crafty.rc and /var/cache/crafty to /var/lib/crafty in the previous version (17.9). Version now is 17.13. The 'move' routine is still in preinst of the latest version because we don't know what version people are upgrading from. Now that's my problem : if upgrade fails or is aborted, I should move the files back to their original location. But if people are upgrading from a 'post-move' version, the original location is different than if they were upgrading from a 'pre-move' location. So, where do I move the files back ??? Copy in the preinst, remove the old one in the postinst (with "configure" argument). That'll do the job. That's what I read in one of your previous message and it made sense to me. Then Henrique argued that it was a bad idea. On Sat, Feb 24, 2001 at 10:42:38PM -0300, Henrique M Holschuh wrote: On Sun, 25 Feb 2001, Julian Gilbey wrote: On Fri, Feb 23, 2001 at 03:57:33PM -0800, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote: in your preinst, check for /etc/foo and if it exists, mkdir /etc/package and Perhaps better: copy it in the postinst, remove the old version in the postinst. Then if any problems arise, the original version will still be present. BAD idea. This will defeat the conffile change detection engine in dpkg, and will cause problems in some cases. Don't do that. Did he just say that because of the typo ? s/postinst/preinst ? Henrique ? Julian -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Julian Gilbey, Dept of Maths, Queen Mary, Univ. of London Debian GNU/Linux Developer, see http://people.debian.org/~jdg Donate free food to the world's hungry: see http://www.thehungersite.com/ -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: keeping files from one version to the other.
On Mon, Feb 26, 2001 at 03:19:54PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote: On Mon, Feb 26, 2001 at 03:33:55AM -1000, Brian Russo wrote: This isn't a very constructive thing to argue anyway... no, but it is amusing, popcorn anyone? There ain't no such thing as free popcorn ;( This popping corn is available under the terms of the Free Food License (FFL). You may redistribute this food (cooked or uncooked), provided that provisions are made for preservation of the food, without compensation or fee to the originator. You are encouraged to send the originator cookies or similar sweets, however this is not required. hm, DFSG-free ? I guess so... but the inherent problem with good popcorn is that, unlike good software, you're inclined NOT to share it. :) So, ... Is it OK if I include /var/lib/crafty in debian/conffiles ? Do I have to include every file or just /var/lib/crafty/* ? -- Digital Electronic Being Intended for Assassination and Nullification -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: finding version of package being installed in postinst
On Sun, Mar 18, 2001 at 02:29:31AM +0100, Ivo Timmermans wrote: Hi, I wonder, is it possible to find out what the last installed version of a package was from postinst? What I want to do is this: a package has released a new upstream version, and they replaced a good deal of configuration options with different ones. It is both impossible to automatically convert the old options to new ones, and it is very hard to reliably check for the presence of old options. So I wondered if I could somehow find out if the user is upgrading from a version before this upstream version, and issue a message referring to a document somewhere in /usr/share/doc during postinst. I have faced the same problem with a package for the last days. If you find out, please let me know :-) Is it possible? thanks. Ivo -- Poak poak, I'm a pengaru! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
dpkg-builpackage doesn't include executable file
I'm building a package for a cellphone manager. It's a simple tcl script, there are no binaries. dpkg-buildpackage places the tcl script in debian/tmp/usr/bin as expected, [eric@femto:~/debian/s25manager-0.82]$ ls -l debian/tmp/usr/bin/ total 48 -rwxr-xr-x1 eric eric46964 avr 12 15:41 s25manager but then this file isn't included in the .deb file. [eric@femto:~/debian/s25manager-0.82]$ dpkg -c ../s25manager_0.82-1_all.deb drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2001-04-12 15:41:33 ./ drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2001-04-12 15:41:29 ./usr/ drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2001-04-12 15:41:28 ./usr/bin/ drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2001-04-12 15:41:30 ./usr/share/ drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2001-04-12 15:41:29 ./usr/share/doc/ drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2001-04-12 15:41:32 ./usr/share/doc/s25manager/ -rw-r--r-- root/root 289 2001-02-03 19:26:38 ./usr/share/doc/s25manager/README -rw-r--r-- root/root 191 2001-04-08 21:00:18 ./usr/share/doc/s25manager/README.Debian -rw-r--r-- root/root 513 2001-04-08 21:19:14 ./usr/share/doc/s25manager/copyright -rw-r--r-- root/root 212 2001-04-08 21:49:47 ./usr/share/doc/s25manager/changelog.Debian.gz drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2001-04-12 15:41:30 ./usr/share/man/ drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2001-04-12 15:41:32 ./usr/share/man/man1/ -rw-r--r-- root/root 961 2001-04-08 22:41:06 ./usr/share/man/man1/s25manager.1.gz drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2001-04-12 15:41:29 ./usr/lib/ drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2001-04-12 15:41:29 ./usr/lib/menu/ -rw-r--r-- root/root 102 2001-04-08 22:17:59 ./usr/lib/menu/s25manager Anyone knows why ? I'm totally clueless. Attached is debian/rules -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] #!/usr/bin/make -f # GNU copyright 1997 to 1999 by Joey Hess. # GNU copyright 2000 by Eric Van Buggenhaut. # Uncomment this to turn on verbose mode. #export DH_VERBOSE=1 # This is the debhelper compatability version to use. export DH_COMPAT=2 configure: configure-stamp configure-stamp: dh_testdir # Add here commands to configure the package. touch configure-stamp build: configure-stamp build-stamp build-stamp: dh_testdir # Add here commands to compile the package. #/usr/bin/docbook-to-man debian/s25manager.sgml s25manager.1 touch build-stamp clean: dh_testdir dh_testroot rm -f build-stamp configure-stamp # Add here commands to clean up after the build process. dh_clean install: build dh_testdir dh_testroot dh_clean -k dh_installdirs # Add here commands to install the package into debian/s25manager. install -d debian/tmp/usr/bin install -m755 -o root -g root s25manager debian/tmp/usr/bin/s25manager # Build architecture-independent files here. binary-indep: build install dh_testversion 2 dh_testdir dh_testroot # dh_installdebconf dh_installdocs # dh_installexamples dh_installmenu # dh_installemacsen # dh_installpam # dh_installinit # dh_installcron dh_installmanpages dh_undocumented dh_installchangelogs # dh_link # dh_strip dh_compress dh_fixperms # You may want to make some executables suid here. # dh_suidregister # dh_makeshlibs dh_installdeb # dh_shlibdeps dh_gencontrol dh_md5sums dh_builddeb # Build architecture-dependent files here. binary-arch: build install # We have nothing to do here. binary: binary-indep binary-arch .PHONY: build clean binary-indep binary-arch binary install configure
Re: shlibs:Depends
OK, thanks for this good piece of advice. On Fri, Apr 13, 2001 at 06:10:22PM -0700, Mike Markley wrote: On Fri, Apr 13, 2001 at 04:30:15PM -0800, Britton [EMAIL PROTECTED] spake forth: It actually works with tcl 8.0, 8.1 and 8.2 you are right. So what about : Depends: tcl8.0 | tcl8.1 | tcl8.2 Or mayby just depend on a version greater than 8.0, as you do with debhelper in you build depend. But Mayby tcl breaks backward compatability a lot and you thing it would be better without that, sort of a judgement call I guess. hat type="Tcl maintainer" Couple of problems with this... 1) tcl8.1 doesn't exist in Debian 2) tcl breaks backwards compatability a *lot* 3) because of #2, there are separate packages for 8.0, 8.2, and 8.3; therefore, a simple Depends: tcl (= 8.0) will not work. All in all, "Depends: tclsh | tcl8.2" should generally work for straightforward scripts, as the language doesn't tend to change that much between releases, just the API for the library and various internals. All of the tcl packages Provide: tclsh, so that'll work for scripts which don't have any insanity preventing them from working with all modern TCLs. Note that lintian complains about depending only on a virtual package, and while a quick glance doesn't find language in policy which forbids it, that is just a quick glance ;). /hat -- Mike Markley [EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG: 0x3B047084 7FC7 0DC0 EF31 DF83 7313 FE2B 77A8 F36A 3B04 7084 "Logic and practical information do not seem to apply here." "You admit that?" "To deny the facts would be illogical, Doctor" - Spock and McCoy, "A Piece of the Action", stardate unknown -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Searching for sponsor....
If you say where your packages are, I can have a look at multiseti. On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 02:18:17PM +0200, Vlatko Kosturjak wrote: Hi! Greetz from Croatia! I'm searching for a sponsor. I've made some packages which I would like to maintain for Debian I made Debian packages for my following programs: multiseti - multiseti utility for managing multiple seti at home packets xplsisnjasp - plugin for xmms which provides lightshow via parport and I made package for program which is not mine: away - terminal locking program with additional capabilities Take care, -- E-mail: http://www.na.linux.hr/kost/mail.html * Vlatko Kosturjak, KoSt Web: http://www.k0st.com * PGP key can be found there too * ICQ: 3631122 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [users] Re: Where's lame
On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 08:43:46AM -0500, Christian T. Steigies wrote: [...] It can be debianised, but it can't be included in debian, since it can't be legally redistributed in binary form. What do you mean ?? There are lots of packages included in debian in source form ... Why don't you read the webpage??? Why does everything have to be exlained again and again when somebody made the effort and explained it on a webpage? wnpp ist the first page you should look at when you want to package something. And its been there for ages, not really hard to find. I wasn't referring to lame, i was just answering the above-mentioned assertion : it can't be included in debian, since it can't be legally redistributed in binary :form. First part of the sentence might be correct, but not for *that* reason. -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Creating man pages (upstream does not have one)
On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 01:27:04AM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote: Othmar Pasteka [EMAIL PROTECTED] cum veritate scripsit: Hmm... anyone going to package manedit ? I tried it. It was rather fun to play with. It edits in roff. Should I upload it ? IIRC, [EMAIL PROTECTED] is maintainer for that package. -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Packaging of Misterhouse
Well, here's the attachment :-) -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] #!/usr/bin/make -f # GNU copyright 1997 to 1999 by Joey Hess. # GNU copyright 2000 by Eric Van Buggenhaut. # Uncomment this to turn on verbose mode. #export DH_VERBOSE=1 # This is the debhelper compatability version to use. export DH_COMPAT=2 configure: configure-stamp configure-stamp: dh_testdir # Add here commands to configure the package. touch configure-stamp build: configure-stamp build-stamp build-stamp: dh_testdir # Add here commands to compile the package. #/usr/bin/docbook-to-man debian/s25manager.sgml s25manager.1 touch build-stamp clean: dh_testdir dh_testroot rm -f build-stamp configure-stamp # Add here commands to clean up after the build process. dh_clean install: build dh_testdir dh_testroot dh_clean -k dh_installdirs # Add here commands to install the package into debian/s25manager. install -d debian/s25manager/usr/bin install -m755 -o root -g root s25manager debian/s25manager/usr/bin/s25manager # Build architecture-independent files here. binary-indep: build install dh_testdir dh_testroot # dh_installdebconf dh_installdocs # dh_installexamples dh_installmenu # dh_installemacsen # dh_installpam # dh_installinit # dh_installcron dh_installmanpages dh_undocumented dh_installchangelogs # dh_link # dh_strip dh_compress dh_fixperms # You may want to make some executables suid here. # dh_suidregister # dh_makeshlibs dh_installdeb # dh_shlibdeps dh_gencontrol dh_md5sums dh_builddeb # Build architecture-dependent files here. binary-arch: build install # We have nothing to do here. binary: binary-indep binary-arch .PHONY: build clean binary-indep binary-arch binary install configure
Re: 2 packages sharing the same config file.
On Mon, May 21, 2001 at 03:55:42PM +0200, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote: Domenico Andreoli [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: maybe using an abacus-common package which owns that conffile... my question now is, is a file worth of a package on its own?!? Nope. Why not just leave the packages conflicting until someone with a real need to have both installed stands up? Well :-) This is the message I got from A. Bunk who handed me the package : It's your package. One thing you could do when you start working on it is to remove the conflict between xabacus and xmabacus - there are better solutions in Debian when two packages share the same file. cu Adrian I'm just looking for the 'better solutions' he mentions but still clueless. Any hint ? -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 2 packages sharing the same config file.
On Sun, May 20, 2001 at 01:42:58AM +0200, Domenico Andreoli wrote: On Fri, May 18, 2001 at 04:22:41AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I just adopted xabacus. It conflicts with xmabacus because both try to install the same config file /etc/X11/app-defaults/Abacus. maybe using an abacus-common package which owns that conffile... my question now is, is a file worth of a package on its own?!? Thank you for your answer. Probably not, especially since this file is +- 10 lines long. -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 2 packages sharing the same config file.
On Tue, May 22, 2001 at 10:11:48PM -0700, Brett Cundal wrote: On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 03:06:26AM +0200, Eric Van Buggenhaut wrote: This is the message I got from A. Bunk who handed me the package : It's your package. One thing you could do when you start working on it is to remove the conflict between xabacus and xmabacus - there are better solutions in Debian when two packages share the same file. cu Adrian I'm just looking for the 'better solutions' he mentions but still clueless. Any hint ? I don't know the details here, but can't you just modify the package to use seperate config files for each binary so they no longer conflict? The only other thing I can think of is to put the common files in one package and have the other dependant on it... That might not be a good solution though. Thank for your comment. Answer to your question is : probably not, the 2 binary files do the same thing. The only difference is that they are built against different libraries (motif/non-motif). The config file just sets thing like the size of the abacus, etc. That's why we use 1 config file for both versions. Just wanted to throw that out for comment... Any comment is always welcomme :-) -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Package mailfilter
If you haven't found anyone let me know and I'll sponsor your package. On Mon, Jun 25, 2001 at 10:26:29AM +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi I build the Package for mailfilter and need a sponsor now to get it into the Debian Archiv. (Don Kennedy started working on it, he also filed a bug against wnpp (#101152) but he cancelled working on it (one mailfilter package is enough :) ). I already asked one to act as a sponsor but he has to much to do, so i ask here now. Mailfilter is very flexible utility for UNIX (-like) operating systems to get rid of unwanted e-mail messages, before having to go through the trouble of downloading them to the local computer. It offers support for one or many POP3 accounts and is especially useful for dialup connections via modem, ISDN, etc. Install Mailfilter if you'd like to remove spam from your POP3 mail accounts. With Mailfilter you can define your own filters (rules) to determine which e-mails should be delivered and which are considered waste. Rules are Regular Expressions, so you can make use of familiar options from other mail delivery programs such as e.g. procmail. If you do not get your Mail from a POP3-Server you don't need Mailfilter. More Info about mailfilter is at http://mailfilter.sourceforge.net and my Debian-Package is at ftp://goliathbbs.dnsalias.net/debian/mailfilter - -- bye Joerg GPG-Keyid: 0x1120D31B Fingerprint: A3D2 83A4 535D A826 F2AA 4348 8BDD 849C 1120 D31B -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE7NvW1i92EnBEg0xsRAkGYAJ9AAWp3Wd2UU/qf4WwHKCiVWi4RggCfcn36 ZR44pj+krrHyJVQYDRn8kjs= =9Xie -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: binary-all packaging
On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 03:13:31AM +0200, Robert Millan wrote: Hello, I'm on my first package. The upstream people provide just a perl script which should go to /usr/bin. I'm reading the instructions of the maintainer's guide (/usr/share/doc/maint-guide/) and all the steps and examples are desgned for creatinga binary package from a source tarball. I've tried to configure this file myself, but when i issue the command 'dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot' i always get the same error: dpkg-genchanges: failure: cannot read files list file: No such file or directory What am i doing wrong? I guess i have a problem in my rules file. just in case i post it here too: --./debian/rules #!/usr/bin/make -f # Sample debian/rules that uses debhelper. # GNU copyright 1997 to 1999 by Joey Hess. # Uncomment this to turn on verbose mode. #export DH_VERBOSE=1 # This is the debhelper compatability version to use. export DH_COMPAT=1 This isn't the solution to your problem, but FYI you should go DH_COMPAT=2 at least build: clean: install: dh_testdir dh_testroot # Add here commands to install the package into debian/tmp. mkdir -p `pwd`/debian/tmp/usr/bin /bin/cp `pwd`/esms `pwd`/debian/tmp/usr/bin/ # Build architecture-independent files here. binary-indep: build install # We have nothing to do by default. # Build architecture-dependent files here. binary-arch: build install binary: binary-indep binary-arch .PHONY: build clean binary-indep binary-arch binary install --EOF thanks-- Robert MillanDebian GNU user zeratul2 wanadoo eshttp://getyouriso.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: debconf and daemons
On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 04:00:47AM +1000, Sam Johnston wrote: Hello all, I'm trying my hand at a somewhat more challenging package this time, which uses debconf to extract a username and password from the user whichi is stored in a config file in /etc and used to start a daemon (specifically a login client). I've got a couple of problems though: - debconf doesn't append '|| true' to the init.d stop in prerm. this means that when start-stop-daemon returns 1 the removal/upgrade fails miserably if the daemon isn't running or can't be stopped. imho this is broken (although it may be better than removing a package under a daemon that refuses to stop?). how do i get around this? ignore it? - install -m 600 myfile /etc/myfile doesn't set the permissions appropriately (?) Why do u want perm 600 ? dh_fixperms should automatically fix perms of files correctly. - debconf was surprisingly easy... however creating the config files once the information has been obtained wasn't. i would have liked to have filled in a template but ended up doing 'echo key value /etc/myfile'. is there a 'standard' way of doing this? perhaps i should be using perl and text::template? Any assistance would be most appreciated, - samj -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: error when building package
On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 01:08:44AM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
Hello,
when i run dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot to create a package, i get the following
error:
dpkg-deb: parse error, in file `debian/esms/DEBIAN/control' near line 6 package
`esms':
`Depends' field, missing package name, or garbage where package name expected
dh_builddeb: command returned error code
while my debian/esms/DEBIAN/control file looks correct:
Package: esms
Version: 0.8.5-1
Section: comm
Priority: optional
Architecture: i386
Depends: ,perl-base, libwww-perl
Looks correct ??
Suggests: fortune
Installed-Size: 44
Maintainer: Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Description: [...]
[...]
and so does my debian/control file:
Source: esms
Section: comm
Priority: optional
Maintainer: Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Standards-Version: 3.0.1
Package: esms
Architecture: any
Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}, perl-base, libwww-perl
Suggests: fortune
Description: [...]
[...]
note that i have tried putting perl-base, libwww-perl before ${shlibs:Depends} to
avoid that strange comma and yet didn't work.
--
Robert MillanDebian GNU user
zeratul2 wanadoo eshttp://getyouriso.org/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: missing file in my package
What DH_COMPAT are you using ? PD : tienes tu clave firmada ya ? On Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 02:13:31PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote: Hello, I'm having some trouble in packaging a program called esms. It only consists of a single binary-all (perl) file that must go on /usr/bin/esms. The problem is that the package is created without it, here's a snapshot of an alienized package: bash-2.03$ tar -xvzf esms-0.9.0-2.tgz ./ ./usr/ ./usr/bin/ ./usr/share/ ./usr/share/doc/ ./usr/share/doc/esms/ ./usr/share/doc/esms/copyright ./usr/share/doc/esms/changelog.Debian.gz bash-2.03$ Here is the (IMHO) relevant part of my debian/rules file: install: build dh_testdir dh_testroot dh_clean -k dh_installdirs # Add here commands to install the package into debian/tmp. install -d debian/tmp/usr/bin install -m755 -o root -g root `pwd`/esms `pwd`/debian/tmp/usr/bin/esms If i missed some information let me know and i'll post it here. Thanks, -- Robert MillanDebian GNU (Hurd) user zeratul2 wanadoo eshttp://getyouriso.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Re: missing file in my package
On Mon, Jul 09, 2001 at 01:55:35AM +0200, Robert Millan wrote: On Mon, 9 Jul 2001 01:04:49 +0200, Eric Van Buggenhaut [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What DH_COMPAT are you using ? I was using DH_COMPAT=2 as you told me in another question, now i've been told that when using the debian/tmp directory i need DH_COMPAT=1 (i noticed you are using debian/package_name directory). So don't worry it's working right now and i've finally made the package. This isn't your best move. You *should* use DH_COMPAT=2 and install the files in debian/package_name When this is corrected, I can have a look at your package and upload it. -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
openacs docs version number
Hi, I recently adopted openacs package. Upstream FTP site provides 2 packages : openacs-3.2.5.tar.gz and openacs-3.2.5-docs.tar.gz. How should I version-number the doc package ? Would openacs-docs_1.0 be OK or shoud I try to stick to binaries package version for now and the future ? Thanks. -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Unresolved symbol
On Tue, Jul 10, 2001 at 04:51:00PM +0530, sumit kalra wrote: Hi everybody, I'm learning to make kernel modules and am currently working on a block device driver. I had installed kernel version 2.2.16-22 (RH - 7.0) and then changed it to 2.2.16 (downloaded from kernel.org). FYI, this is a Debian mailing list. Maybe you could post to Suse lists. -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
dpkg can't purge init script
Sorry for cross-posting, I posted to the wrong list first. I can't purge a package : curitiba_POTATO:/# dpkg --purge superviser-server (Reading database ... 9401 files and directories currently installed.) Removing superviser-server ... Stopping superviser-server: dpkg: error processing superviser-server (--purge): subprocess pre-removal script returned error exit status 1 update-rc.d: /etc/init.d/superviser-server exists during rc.d purge (use -f to force) dpkg: error while cleaning up: subprocess post-installation script returned error exit status 1 Errors were encountered while processing: superviser-server curitiba_POTATO:/# ls -l /etc/init.d/superviser-server -rwxr-xr-x1 root root 1945 Jul 27 11:10 /etc/init.d/superviser-server curitiba_POTATO:/# Here comes the script : [eric@curitibaPOTATO:~/arturo/superviser-server-1.0]$ more debian/prerm #! /bin/sh # prerm script for superviser-server # # see: dh_installdeb(1) set -e # summary of how this script can be called: #* prerm `remove' #* old-prerm `upgrade' new-version #* new-prerm `failed-upgrade' old-version #* conflictor's-prerm `remove' `in-favour' package new-version #* deconfigured's-prerm `deconfigure' `in-favour' # package-being-installed version `removing' # conflicting-package version # for details, see /usr/doc/packaging-manual/ case $1 in remove|upgrade|deconfigure) # install-info --quiet --remove /usr/info/superviser-server.info.gz ;; failed-upgrade) ;; *) echo prerm called with unknown argument \`$1' 2 exit 0 ;; esac # dh_installdeb will replace this with shell code automatically # generated by other debhelper scripts. #DEBHELPER# exit 0 [eric@curitibaPOTATO:~/arturo/superviser-server-1.0]$ And the debhelper script : [eric@curitibaPOTATO:~/arturo/superviser-server-1.0]$ more debian/prerm.debhelper # Automatically added by dh_installdocs if [ \( $1 = upgrade -o $1 = remove \) -a -L /usr/doc/superviser-server ]; then rm -f /usr/doc/superviser-server fi # End automatically added section # Automatically added by dh_installinit /etc/init.d/superviser-server stop # End automatically added section [eric@curitibaPOTATO:~/arturo/superviser-server-1.0]$ Is this a bug in debhelper ? -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT \_|_/ Andago \/ \/ Av. Santa Engracia num 54 a n d a g o |--Telef: 91-2041100 /\___/\ http://www.andago.com / | \ Innovando en Internet [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dpkg can't purge init script
On Thu, Aug 23, 2001 at 12:05:01AM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote: On Wed, Aug 22, 2001 at 07:44:29PM +0200, Eric Van Buggenhaut wrote: I can't purge a package : curitiba_POTATO:/# dpkg --purge superviser-server (Reading database ... 9401 files and directories currently installed.) Removing superviser-server ... Stopping superviser-server: dpkg: error processing superviser-server (--purge): subprocess pre-removal script returned error exit status 1 [BTW, should the package be called supervisOr-server?] So it looks as though the superviser-server init.d stop script exited with exit status 1 instead of 0. Here comes the script : [eric@curitibaPOTATO:~/arturo/superviser-server-1.0]$ more debian/prerm #! /bin/sh # prerm script for superviser-server # # see: dh_installdeb(1) set -e so it will exist on any error... case $1 in remove|upgrade|deconfigure) # install-info --quiet --remove /usr/info/superviser-server.info.gz ;; failed-upgrade) ;; *) echo prerm called with unknown argument \`$1' 2 exit 0 This should probably be exit 1. Well, my script is the exact copy of the skeleton found in /usr/share/debhelper/dh_make/debian/prerm.ex where it is exit 0 ;; esac # dh_installdeb will replace this with shell code automatically # generated by other debhelper scripts. #DEBHELPER# exit 0 And the debhelper script : [eric@curitibaPOTATO:~/arturo/superviser-server-1.0]$ more debian/prerm.debhelper # Automatically added by dh_installdocs if [ \( $1 = upgrade -o $1 = remove \) -a -L /usr/doc/superviser-server ]; then rm -f /usr/doc/superviser-server fi # End automatically added section OK there. # Automatically added by dh_installinit /etc/init.d/superviser-server stop # End automatically added section And that's OK, _as long as /etc/init.d/superviser-server stop returns with a zero exit status_. Is this a bug in debhelper ? Doesn't appear to be. Check that /etc/init.d/superviser-server uses the correct exit status. Again, /etc/init.d/superviser-server is a copy of the skeleton found in /usr/share/debhelper/debian/init.d.ex : [eric@curitiba:~]$ diff -u /usr/share/debhelper/dh_make/debian/init.d.ex chroot/potato/home/eric/arturo/superviser-server-1.0/debian/init.d --- /usr/share/debhelper/dh_make/debian/init.d.ex Wed Mar 14 22:25:48 2001 +++ chroot/potato/home/eric/arturo/superviser-server-1.0/debian/init.d Fri Jul 27 13:10:59 2001 @@ -9,12 +9,14 @@ # # Version: @(#)skeleton 1.8 03-Mar-1998 [EMAIL PROTECTED] # -# This file was automatically customized by dh-make on #DATE# +# This file was automatically customized by dh-make on Fri, 27 Jul 2001 11:27:34 +0200 +# +# Modified for superviser-server by Eric Van Buggenhaut [EMAIL PROTECTED] -PATH=/sbin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin -DAEMON=/usr/sbin/#PACKAGE# -NAME=#PACKAGE# -DESC=#PACKAGE# +PATH=/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/sbin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin +DAEMON=/usr/sbin/superviser-server.pl +NAME=superviser-server +DESC=superviser-server test -f $DAEMON || exit 0 [eric@curitiba:~]$ Problem seems to be that prerm remove fails : curitiba_POTATO:/# /var/lib/dpkg/info/superviser-server.prerm remove ; echo $? Stopping superviser-server: 1 curitiba_POTATO:/# Because : curitiba_POTATO:/# start-stop-daemon --stop --quiet --pidfile /var/run/superviser-server.pid --exec /usr/sbin/superviser-server.pl ; echo $? 1 curitiba_POTATO:/# If you have any idea ... Thanks for your help anyway. PS : I'll move this thread to -mentors, where it belongs to -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT Real Programers don't use Pascal \_|_/ Andago \/ \/ Av. Santa Engracia num 54 a n d a g o |--Telef: 91-2041100 /\___/\ http://www.andago.com / | \ Innovando en Internet [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dpkg can't purge init script
On Wed, Aug 22, 2001 at 10:28:42PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote: On Wed, Aug 22, 2001 at 09:24:02PM +0200, Eric Van Buggenhaut wrote: Sorry for cross-posting, I posted to the wrong list first. I can't purge a package : [...] Clearly the thing that is returning 1 lies in the debhelper prerm. And the debhelper script : [eric@curitibaPOTATO:~/arturo/superviser-server-1.0]$ more debian/prerm.debhelper # Automatically added by dh_installdocs if [ \( $1 = upgrade -o $1 = remove \) -a -L /usr/doc/superviser-server ]; then rm -f /usr/doc/superviser-server rm -f always returns 0, not that. fi # End automatically added section # Automatically added by dh_installinit /etc/init.d/superviser-server stop That's the only thing it could be. Your init.d script is failing and returning 1. It is bugged, fix it. Hint: --oknodo parameter to start-stop-daemon (look it up). OK, --oknodo did the trick. Thanks. I don't see the point why this option isn't shipped in the default file. -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
place of ldconfig in postinst
Hi, I'm building my first packages with shared library. This is what my postinst states: case $1 in configure) ldconfig ;; abort-upgrade|abort-remove|abort-deconfigure) ;; *) echo postinst called with unknown argument \`$1' 2 Still lintian complains about: W: iiwusynth: postinst-unsafe-ldconfig N: N: The postinst script calls ldconfig unsafely. The postinst must only N: call ldconfig when given the argument configure. N: N: Refer to Policy Manual, chapter 9 for details. Sorry, I don't get it ! -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: place of ldconfig in postinst
On Thu, Nov 01, 2001 at 10:56:25AM -0500, Steve M. Robbins wrote: On Thu, Nov 01, 2001 at 04:00:34PM +0100, Eric Van Buggenhaut wrote: Hi, I'm building my first packages with shared library. This is what my postinst states: case $1 in configure) ldconfig ;; abort-upgrade|abort-remove|abort-deconfigure) ;; *) echo postinst called with unknown argument \`$1' 2 By the way, if you use the debhelper scripts (dh_makeshlibs in particular) , you don't need to write the postinst by hand, and as a bonus, lintian will not complain about it. OK, done ! -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Package review
Please inform the administrators of your server (www.cbu.edu) that their router is broken. It rejects ECN enabled. On Mon, Oct 29, 2001 at 12:52:18PM -0600, Warren Turkal wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Could someone please take a look at my package for uml at: http://www.cbu.edu/~wturkal/debian/ Warren - -- GPG Fingerprint: 30C8 BDF1 B133 14CB 832F 2C5D 99A1 A19F 559D 9E88 GPG Public Key @ http://www.cbu.edu/~wturkal/wturkal.gpg -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE73aVnmaGhn1WdnogRAkQTAJ48avRruokN88AYPCZkUIutRshdEACePaOd eELhEzDxa2gxPvTJwCjujzY= =ek78 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: place of ldconfig in postinst
On Fri, Nov 02, 2001 at 10:17:36AM -0800, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote: This is no different from working with a bunch of coders and everyone agreeing on a common code formatting. Talk to the maintainer of debhelper ? dh_make is NOT maintained by Joey Hess, the debhelper maint. In fact he has nothing to do with it. Oh, sorry. I was confused by the fact that the maintainer's scripts were kept under /usr/share/debhelper. Should we ask Craig Small [EMAIL PROTECTED] to sync those .ex files with Lintian ? -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Package review
On Sun, Nov 04, 2001 at 03:04:18PM -0600, Warren Turkal wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Does anyone have any links for ECN stuff with relation to Cisco routers as my sysadmin at school does not know what ECN is. Warren See http://www.aciri.org/floyd/ecn.html and http://www.tux.org/lkml/#s14-2 OTOH, please fix your mail client, I received your message 3 (!) times. Thanks. -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
changing a package Architecture:
Hi,
I just adopted a package which is nothing but a Perl script. Previous
maitainer built it using
Architecture: any
when it had to be
Architecture: all
(correct me if I'm wrong)
Now that I'm uploading a new version of package with correct Architecture, should I
ask ftp-master
to remove the *{i386,m68,arm}.deb files ? or is it automatic ?
Thanks.
--
Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
no shlibdeps in DEBIAN/control
Since some days, when building packages, I don't have libc6 version
included anymore. dpkg-deb then complains:
[eric@mrmimePOTATO:~/gdm-2.2.2.1]$ less debian/tmp/DEBIAN/control
Package: gdm
Version: 2.2.2.1-ximian.12linex6
Section: x11
Priority: optional
Architecture: i386
Depends: , libpam-modules (= 0.72-1), adduser, xutils | xbase-clients, gdm-cleaner
because of that. debian/control is fine though :
[...]
Package: gdm
Architecture: any
Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}, libpam-modules (= 0.72-1), adduser,
xutils | xbase-clients, gdm-cleaner
Suggests: xsm, locales
Conflicts: wdm, xdm, kdm
[...]
So what's the problem ?
Please Cc me.
--
Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT Los niños son esponjas
(Amaya Rodrigo Sastre)
\_|_/ Andago
\/ \/ Av. Santa Engracia, 54
a n d a g o |--E-28010 Madrid - tfno:+34(91)2041100
/\___/\ http://www.andago.com
/ | \ Innovando en Internet
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: unversioned shared library
On Thu, Jun 20, 2002 at 01:10 +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote: Eric Van Buggenhaut [EMAIL PROTECTED] immo vero scripsit: I never made a separate packages for the lib part (no -dev either) cause the package is really small but now some other DD asks me for an extra package, containing the lib (+ another -dev package) because his own package depends on the same library. Upstream author never versioned his dynamic library. What am I supposed to do ? What soname should I use for the library ? See libpkg-guide for some help. adding something to: libwhatever_la_LDFLAGS = -export-dynamic -release @VERSION@ -version-info 0:0:0 to Makefile.am should create something reasonable for an unstable shared library, suggest using this for the upstream (if they do versioning at all). This doesn't work here: [eric@femto]$ automake Makefile.am:5: invalid unused variable name: `libiiwusynth_la_LDFLAGS' [eric@femto]$ [eric@femto]$cat Makefile.am ## Process this file with automake to produce Makefile.in SUBDIRS = src EXTRA_DIST = TODO acconfig.h acinclude.m4 libiiwusynth_la_LDFLAGS = -export-dynamic -release @VERSION@ -version-info 0:0:0 [eric@femto]$ -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: unversioned shared library
On Thu, Jul 04, 2002 at 10:23 +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote: Eric Van Buggenhaut [EMAIL PROTECTED] immo vero scripsit: This doesn't work here: [eric@femto]$ automake Makefile.am:5: invalid unused variable name: `libiiwusynth_la_LDFLAGS' [eric@femto]$ [eric@femto]$cat Makefile.am ## Process this file with automake to produce Makefile.in SUBDIRS = src EXTRA_DIST = TODO acconfig.h acinclude.m4 libiiwusynth_la_LDFLAGS = -export-dynamic -release @VERSION@ -version-info 0:0:0 [eric@femto]$ You're adding it to the wrong Makefile.am Add it somewhere with libiiwusynth_la_SOURCES are defined. Oh, silly me ! Thanks for the hint. -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
what to do with binary conffiles ?
Hi everyone, I'm the maintainer of crafty, a chess engine (http://packages.debian.org/crafty). When you install crafty for the first time, it installed compiled opening books in /var/lib/crafty. Then, as it plays against you, it 'learns' from the games and add the new moves to the opening books that live in /var/lib/crafty. Because You don't want your 'updated' opening books to be replaced by crafty's default ones when you install a new version of the package, these opening books are marked as conffiles. Now, recently, bugs have been filed against the package, complaining about conffiles being binaries: http://bugs.debian.org/154798 http://bugs.debian.org/154502 So, is it a problem to have conffiles being binary ? Do you have any idea about how I could fix this (if it actually has to be fixed)? Please CC me on reply. Thanks. -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: what to do with binary conffiles ?
On Tue, Jul 30, 2002 at 03:33 +0100, Mark Brown wrote: On Tue, Jul 30, 2002 at 04:15:11PM +0200, Eric Van Buggenhaut wrote: When you install crafty for the first time, it installed compiled opening books in /var/lib/crafty. Then, as it plays against you, it 'learns' from the games and add the new moves to the opening books that live in /var/lib/crafty. Because You don't want your 'updated' opening books to be replaced by crafty's default ones when you install a new version of the package, these opening books are marked as conffiles. The bugs aren't just about the binary bit, they're also about the fact that you shouldn't have conffiles in /var. I don't agree with you here. When you have games that use high scores files, these are placed in /var as per FHS 5.4 (http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/fhs/fhs-5.4.html) and obvioulsy tagged as conffiles (you don't want to lose your high scores files when upgrading the game). So, is it a problem to have conffiles being binary ? Do you have any idea about how I could fix this (if it actually has to be fixed)? You definately need to remove the conffiles from /var. Why not just ship the files in /usr/lib or something and then in the postinst copy them to the place the package access them from if they aren't already there? I like this idea. Thanks for the tip. One drawback I see is that crafty-books-medium install a 30MB opening book file, if we go copying it from /usr/lib to /var/lib, we're wasting 30MB user's disk space, he might not like it. -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: what to do with binary conffiles ?
On Tue, Jul 30, 2002 at 12:24 -0500, Mark Brown wrote: On Tue, Jul 30, 2002 at 06:14:55PM +0200, Eric Van Buggenhaut wrote: I don't agree with you here. When you have games that use high scores files, these are placed in /var as per FHS 5.4 (http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/fhs/fhs-5.4.html) and obvioulsy tagged as conffiles (you don't want to lose your high scores files when upgrading the game). This is an error. *Nothing* outside of /etc should be a conffile. See policy 11.7.2. We're talking about conffiles here. Please see Policy 11.7.1: Definitions Please CC'me on reply -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
library version equals to project version ?
Hi fellow developpers, I maintain iiwusynth, which until now shipped unversioned libraries. I have been discussing with upstream author for the past days and he agreed that versioning libraries is certainly a good thing. He's in the process of versioning his libraries but asked me details about the versioning scheme, and I'm not sure what the correct answer his... In two words, his question is: should a binary and the library it depends on have the same version number ? Say foo is version M.m.p and depends on foo dynamic library. Should the library necesarily be called libfooM of could it be libfooX ? On one hand I have the example of avifile-player version 0.7.12.20020719-1.2, which depends on libavifile0 version 0.7. OTOH, we have aspell version 0.33.7.1 which depends on libaspell10 version 0.33.7 What is the Very True Way ? I paste below the details of his question: Please CC me on reply. Thanks for your help. - Forwarded message from Peter Hanappe [EMAIL PROTECTED] - From: Peter Hanappe [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: bug in iiwusynth: dubious FPE logging implementation X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS new-20020517 X-Razor-id: 44bb8d5d94b139efb3297b797e4e382641ab7d54 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.6 tests=MAY_BE_FORGED Eric Van Buggenhaut wrote: [...] You said in a previous mail: Binary executables should be compatible with one major version, all across its succesive minor numbers. Just to make sure I get this right, do you mind I write down a little scenario: - I install iiwusynth-M.m.p that is linked against libiiwusynth.so.X. The ABI version of libiiwusynth is X. - Later, I update to iiwusynth-M.m+1.p that is also linked against libiiwusynth.so.X. There should be no problems since they are ABI compatible. I don't necessarily have to update libiiwusynth. - I update libiiwusynth to a newer version, however that is still ABI version X (i.e. libiiwusynth.so.X), everything continues to work. - However, if I update iiwusynth to version M.m+2.p that is linked against libiiwusynth.so.X+1 there is a conflict and I'll need to install libiiwusynth.so.X+1 as well. Is this about correct? Yes, that's exactly how it works. One detail though, in the scenario above X always = M so I rewrite it: This I don't understand. I have been searching on the web a little and I thought I understood that the library version isn't necessarily equal to the project version. For example, I checked on the debian web site, libaspell version 0.33.7.1-8 (package libaspell10) installs libaspell.so.10, and not libaspell.so.0 (M=0, X=10). I don't want to update iiwusynth to version 1.x.y because somehow (psychologically) version 1.x is the first stable release. If X always = M than *all* libraries before iiwusynth 1.0 have major number 0. It's impossible to keep all those 0 library version ABI compatible, especially in the beginning of a project. Let me know what your thoughts on this are. We'd better straighten this all out before making new packages to avoid future confusion. Sorry to annoy you with all these questions but I want to make sure I understand it correctly. - End forwarded message - -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
what to do with binary conffiles ?
Hi everyone, I'm the maintainer of crafty, a chess engine (http://packages.debian.org/crafty). When you install crafty for the first time, it installed compiled opening books in /var/lib/crafty. Then, as it plays against you, it 'learns' from the games and add the new moves to the opening books that live in /var/lib/crafty. Because You don't want your 'updated' opening books to be replaced by crafty's default ones when you install a new version of the package, these opening books are marked as conffiles. Now, recently, bugs have been filed against the package, complaining about conffiles being binaries: http://bugs.debian.org/154798 http://bugs.debian.org/154502 So, is it a problem to have conffiles being binary ? Do you have any idea about how I could fix this (if it actually has to be fixed)? Please CC me on reply. Thanks. -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: what to do with binary conffiles ?
On Tue, Jul 30, 2002 at 03:33 +0100, Mark Brown wrote: On Tue, Jul 30, 2002 at 04:15:11PM +0200, Eric Van Buggenhaut wrote: When you install crafty for the first time, it installed compiled opening books in /var/lib/crafty. Then, as it plays against you, it 'learns' from the games and add the new moves to the opening books that live in /var/lib/crafty. Because You don't want your 'updated' opening books to be replaced by crafty's default ones when you install a new version of the package, these opening books are marked as conffiles. The bugs aren't just about the binary bit, they're also about the fact that you shouldn't have conffiles in /var. I don't agree with you here. When you have games that use high scores files, these are placed in /var as per FHS 5.4 (http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/fhs/fhs-5.4.html) and obvioulsy tagged as conffiles (you don't want to lose your high scores files when upgrading the game). So, is it a problem to have conffiles being binary ? Do you have any idea about how I could fix this (if it actually has to be fixed)? You definately need to remove the conffiles from /var. Why not just ship the files in /usr/lib or something and then in the postinst copy them to the place the package access them from if they aren't already there? I like this idea. Thanks for the tip. One drawback I see is that crafty-books-medium install a 30MB opening book file, if we go copying it from /usr/lib to /var/lib, we're wasting 30MB user's disk space, he might not like it. -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: what to do with binary conffiles ?
On Tue, Jul 30, 2002 at 12:24 -0500, Mark Brown wrote: On Tue, Jul 30, 2002 at 06:14:55PM +0200, Eric Van Buggenhaut wrote: I don't agree with you here. When you have games that use high scores files, these are placed in /var as per FHS 5.4 (http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/fhs/fhs-5.4.html) and obvioulsy tagged as conffiles (you don't want to lose your high scores files when upgrading the game). This is an error. *Nothing* outside of /etc should be a conffile. See policy 11.7.2. We're talking about conffiles here. Please see Policy 11.7.1: Definitions Please CC'me on reply -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
library version equals to project version ?
Hi fellow developpers, I maintain iiwusynth, which until now shipped unversioned libraries. I have been discussing with upstream author for the past days and he agreed that versioning libraries is certainly a good thing. He's in the process of versioning his libraries but asked me details about the versioning scheme, and I'm not sure what the correct answer his... In two words, his question is: should a binary and the library it depends on have the same version number ? Say foo is version M.m.p and depends on foo dynamic library. Should the library necesarily be called libfooM of could it be libfooX ? On one hand I have the example of avifile-player version 0.7.12.20020719-1.2, which depends on libavifile0 version 0.7. OTOH, we have aspell version 0.33.7.1 which depends on libaspell10 version 0.33.7 What is the Very True Way ? I paste below the details of his question: Please CC me on reply. Thanks for your help. - Forwarded message from Peter Hanappe [EMAIL PROTECTED] - From: Peter Hanappe [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: bug in iiwusynth: dubious FPE logging implementation X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS new-20020517 X-Razor-id: 44bb8d5d94b139efb3297b797e4e382641ab7d54 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.6 tests=MAY_BE_FORGED Eric Van Buggenhaut wrote: [...] You said in a previous mail: Binary executables should be compatible with one major version, all across its succesive minor numbers. Just to make sure I get this right, do you mind I write down a little scenario: - I install iiwusynth-M.m.p that is linked against libiiwusynth.so.X. The ABI version of libiiwusynth is X. - Later, I update to iiwusynth-M.m+1.p that is also linked against libiiwusynth.so.X. There should be no problems since they are ABI compatible. I don't necessarily have to update libiiwusynth. - I update libiiwusynth to a newer version, however that is still ABI version X (i.e. libiiwusynth.so.X), everything continues to work. - However, if I update iiwusynth to version M.m+2.p that is linked against libiiwusynth.so.X+1 there is a conflict and I'll need to install libiiwusynth.so.X+1 as well. Is this about correct? Yes, that's exactly how it works. One detail though, in the scenario above X always = M so I rewrite it: This I don't understand. I have been searching on the web a little and I thought I understood that the library version isn't necessarily equal to the project version. For example, I checked on the debian web site, libaspell version 0.33.7.1-8 (package libaspell10) installs libaspell.so.10, and not libaspell.so.0 (M=0, X=10). I don't want to update iiwusynth to version 1.x.y because somehow (psychologically) version 1.x is the first stable release. If X always = M than *all* libraries before iiwusynth 1.0 have major number 0. It's impossible to keep all those 0 library version ABI compatible, especially in the beginning of a project. Let me know what your thoughts on this are. We'd better straighten this all out before making new packages to avoid future confusion. Sorry to annoy you with all these questions but I want to make sure I understand it correctly. - End forwarded message - -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Wrong permissions
Hi,
I'm a DD to be, waiting for the DAM to open my accounts. I want to adopt an
orphaned package called crafty, a chess game player. i rebuild a new package
since there's a new
upstream code.
The package installs opening books in /var/lib/crafty. Since the program also
learns how to play, it regularly updates these opening books. Although I
explicitely specified in debian/rules to change the permissions on those files
to rw-rw-rw, my files in debian/tmp/var/lib/crafty are still rw-r--r--.
I also noted all the files belong to me. Is it correct ? If I run
'dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot' as root, files belong to root, which looks
saner, but it doesn't ask for any GPG key.
What can I do ?
Attached is the contents of debian/tmp/var/lib/crafty and debian/rules
Thank you.
--
Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT
Rue J. Robie, 58/13
1060 Bruxelles
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
#!/usr/bin/make -f
# Sample debian/rules that uses debhelper.
# GNU copyright 1997 to 1999 by Joey Hess.
# Uncomment this to turn on verbose mode.
#export DH_VERBOSE=1
# This is the debhelper compatability version to use.
export DH_COMPAT=1
build: build-stamp
build-stamp:
dh_testdir
# Add here commands to compile the package.
$(MAKE)
#Build the openings books.
echo book create debian/books/medtosmall.txt 60 \
| ./crafty
echo books create debian/books/start.pgn 60 \
| ./crafty
touch build-stamp
clean:
dh_testdir
dh_testroot
rm -f build-stamp
rm -rf debian/tmp debian/files* core debian/substvars
rm -f game* log* position* books.bin book.bin book.lrn
# Add here commands to clean up after the build process.
-$(MAKE) clean
dh_clean
install: build
dh_testdir
dh_testroot
dh_clean -k
dh_installdirs
# dh_installdirs etc usr/games var/cache/crafty usr/doc/crafty
usr/share/doc/crafty usr/share/man/man6
# Add here commands to install the package into debian/tmp.
# $(MAKE) install DESTDIR=`pwd`/debian/tmp
install -d debian/tmp
cd debian/tmp install -d `cat ../dirs`
ln -sf ../man7/undocumented.7.gz \
debian/tmp/usr/share/man/man6/crafty.6.gz
ln -sf ./crafty.6.gz \
debian/tmp/usr/share/man/man6/crafty.bin.6.gz
install -s crafty debian/tmp/usr/games/crafty.bin
cp crafty.wrapper debian/tmp/usr/games/crafty
install -m666 books.bin debian/tmp/var/lib/crafty
install -m666 book.{bin,lrn} debian/tmp/var/lib/crafty
install -m666 position.{bin,lrn} debian/tmp/var/lib/crafty
cp debian/doc/crafty.{faq,doc} debian/tmp/usr/share/doc/crafty
cp debian/doc/read.me debian/tmp/usr/share/doc/crafty
install -m666 debian/crafty.rc debian/tmp/etc
gzip -9 debian/tmp/usr/share/doc/crafty/read.me
# chmod 666 debian/tmp/var/lib/crafty/book*
# chmod 666 debian/tmp/var/lib/crafty/position*
# Build architecture-independent files here.
binary-indep: build install
# We have nothing to do by default.
# Build architecture-dependent files here.
binary-arch: build install
# dh_testversion
dh_testdir
# dh_testroot
# dh_installdebconf
dh_installdocs
dh_installexamples
dh_installmenu
# dh_installemacsen
# dh_installpam
# dh_installinit
# dh_installcron
dh_installmanpages
# dh_installinfo
# dh_undocumented
dh_installchangelogs
dh_link
dh_strip
dh_compress
dh_fixperms
# You may want to make some executables suid here.
# dh_suidregister
# dh_makeshlibs
dh_installdeb
# dh_perl
dh_shlibdeps
dh_gencontrol
dh_md5sums
dh_builddeb
binary: binary-indep binary-arch
.PHONY: build clean binary-indep binary-arch binary install
var_lib_crafty.dir
Description: application/director
Re: Wrong permissions
On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 08:11:41AM +, Colin Watson wrote: Eric Van Buggenhaut [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm a DD to be, waiting for the DAM to open my accounts. I want to adopt an orphaned package called crafty, a chess game player. i rebuild a new package since there's a new upstream code. The package installs opening books in /var/lib/crafty. Since the program also learns how to play, it regularly updates these opening books. Although I explicitely specified in debian/rules to change the permissions on those files to rw-rw-rw, my files in debian/tmp/var/lib/crafty are still rw-r--r--. Mode 666? Are you really sure? I can't see any justification for that. Perhaps use 664 instead and make the program setgid. I'm not sure I understand. All files belong to group root, so making the opening books files setgid doesn't help. Maybe I have to create a new group called chess and chown root.chess debian/tmp/var/lib/crafty, then add the chessplayers to this group. Any idea ? dh_fixperms is removing the extra write permissions - see its man page. You either need to exclude some files or change their permissions after calling dh_fixperms. This worked fine, ok. A few other nits about the posted debian/rules: rm -rf debian/tmp debian/files* core debian/substvars dh_clean will clean up all of these for you. Changed dh_installdirs [...] cd debian/tmp install -d `cat ../dirs` dh_installdirs should already have done this. Changed install -s crafty debian/tmp/usr/games/crafty.bin A DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=nostrip facility (see policy 4.1) would be nice here. Added too. Cheers, -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Eric Van Buggenhaut - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please don't send proprietary format documents, I can't open them. Use instead open-source formats like .txt or .rtf. Dvi, ps or tex files are welcome.
Fwd: Message Undeliverable! (Sat, Feb 24, 2001 at 11:58:22AM -0700 eric)
Any idea why this is happening to all my e-mails to this list sincde this morning ? - Forwarded message from [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Envelope-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Message Undeliverable! X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 Feb 2001 18:58:22.0974 (UTC) FILETIME=[C2AAF9E0:01C09E93] Date: 24 Feb 2001 11:58:22 -0700 The email you sent was routed to our server, but there were no recipients at this domain. Please check the address and send the message again. Thanks. Here are the recipients: debian-mentors@lists.debian.org - End forwarded message - -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: /etc/ question
On Sat, Feb 24, 2001 at 10:42:38PM -0300, Henrique M Holschuh wrote: [...] Remember to correctly unwind, moving the conffile back to its original place (as long as the original file does not exist) in the abort-install and abort-upgrade targets of preinst, postrm and postinst. [never tried this, but that seems to be what's needed from the not-so-clear policy chapter 6] In the package I maintain, called crafty, I moved /etc/craftyrc to /etc/crafty.rc and /var/cache/crafty to /var/lib/crafty in the previous version (17.9). Version now is 17.13. The 'move' routine is still in preinst of the latest version because we don't know what version people are upgrading from. Now that's my problem : if upgrade fails or is aborted, I should move the files back to their original location. But if people are upgrading from a 'post-move' version, the original location is different than if they were upgrading from a 'pre-move' location. So, where do I move the files back ??? -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
keeping files from one version to the other.
Hi,
I'm in NM and I have adopted and packaged crafty, a chess engine.
Now, crafty keeps its opening books files in /var/lib/crafty and these files
are updated whenever a new position is played. Crafty 'learns' :-)
My problem is : when upgrading the package, the files in /var/lib/crafty are
overwritten by the original files coming with the new version package. How can
I preserve these files from being overwritten ? The files are normally
installed by debian/rules :
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/debian/crafty-17.13]$ less debian/rules
[...]
install: build
dh_testdir
dh_testroot
dh_clean -k
dh_installdirs
# Add here commands to install the package into debian/tmp.
install -d debian/tmp
ln -sf ./crafty.6.gz \
debian/tmp/usr/share/man/man6/crafty.bin.6.gz
install -m2755 -o root -g games crafty debian/tmp/usr/games/crafty.bin
install crafty.wrapper debian/tmp/usr/games/crafty
install -m664 -o root -g games books.bin debian/tmp/var/lib/crafty
install -m664 -o root -g games book.{bin,lrn} debian/tmp/var/lib/crafty
install -m664 -o root -g games position.{bin,lrn}
debian/tmp/var/lib/crafty
install debian/doc/crafty.{faq,doc} debian/tmp/usr/share/doc/crafty
install debian/doc/read.me debian/tmp/usr/share/doc/crafty
install -m666 debian/crafty.rc debian/tmp/etc
[...]
Thanks.
--
Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: /etc/ question
On Sun, Feb 25, 2001 at 09:34:19AM +, Julian Gilbey wrote: On Sun, Feb 25, 2001 at 05:15:37AM +0100, Eric Van Buggenhaut wrote: Remember to correctly unwind, moving the conffile back to its original place (as long as the original file does not exist) in the abort-install and abort-upgrade targets of preinst, postrm and postinst. [never tried this, but that seems to be what's needed from the not-so-clear policy chapter 6] In the package I maintain, called crafty, I moved /etc/craftyrc to /etc/crafty.rc and /var/cache/crafty to /var/lib/crafty in the previous version (17.9). Version now is 17.13. The 'move' routine is still in preinst of the latest version because we don't know what version people are upgrading from. Now that's my problem : if upgrade fails or is aborted, I should move the files back to their original location. But if people are upgrading from a 'post-move' version, the original location is different than if they were upgrading from a 'pre-move' location. So, where do I move the files back ??? Copy in the preinst, remove the old one in the postinst (with configure argument). That'll do the job. That's what I read in one of your previous message and it made sense to me. Then Henrique argued that it was a bad idea. On Sat, Feb 24, 2001 at 10:42:38PM -0300, Henrique M Holschuh wrote: On Sun, 25 Feb 2001, Julian Gilbey wrote: On Fri, Feb 23, 2001 at 03:57:33PM -0800, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote: in your preinst, check for /etc/foo and if it exists, mkdir /etc/package and Perhaps better: copy it in the postinst, remove the old version in the postinst. Then if any problems arise, the original version will still be present. BAD idea. This will defeat the conffile change detection engine in dpkg, and will cause problems in some cases. Don't do that. Did he just say that because of the typo ? s/postinst/preinst ? Henrique ? Julian -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Julian Gilbey, Dept of Maths, Queen Mary, Univ. of London Debian GNU/Linux Developer, see http://people.debian.org/~jdg Donate free food to the world's hungry: see http://www.thehungersite.com/ -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: keeping files from one version to the other.
On Mon, Feb 26, 2001 at 03:19:54PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote: On Mon, Feb 26, 2001 at 03:33:55AM -1000, Brian Russo wrote: This isn't a very constructive thing to argue anyway... no, but it is amusing, popcorn anyone? There ain't no such thing as free popcorn ;( This popping corn is available under the terms of the Free Food License (FFL). You may redistribute this food (cooked or uncooked), provided that provisions are made for preservation of the food, without compensation or fee to the originator. You are encouraged to send the originator cookies or similar sweets, however this is not required. hm, DFSG-free ? I guess so... but the inherent problem with good popcorn is that, unlike good software, you're inclined NOT to share it. :) So, ... Is it OK if I include /var/lib/crafty in debian/conffiles ? Do I have to include every file or just /var/lib/crafty/* ? -- Digital Electronic Being Intended for Assassination and Nullification -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: finding version of package being installed in postinst
On Sun, Mar 18, 2001 at 02:29:31AM +0100, Ivo Timmermans wrote: Hi, I wonder, is it possible to find out what the last installed version of a package was from postinst? What I want to do is this: a package has released a new upstream version, and they replaced a good deal of configuration options with different ones. It is both impossible to automatically convert the old options to new ones, and it is very hard to reliably check for the presence of old options. So I wondered if I could somehow find out if the user is upgrading from a version before this upstream version, and issue a message referring to a document somewhere in /usr/share/doc during postinst. I have faced the same problem with a package for the last days. If you find out, please let me know :-) Is it possible? thanks. Ivo -- Poak poak, I'm a pengaru! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
dpkg-builpackage doesn't include executable file
I'm building a package for a cellphone manager. It's a simple tcl script, there are no binaries. dpkg-buildpackage places the tcl script in debian/tmp/usr/bin as expected, [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/debian/s25manager-0.82]$ ls -l debian/tmp/usr/bin/ total 48 -rwxr-xr-x1 eric eric46964 avr 12 15:41 s25manager but then this file isn't included in the .deb file. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/debian/s25manager-0.82]$ dpkg -c ../s25manager_0.82-1_all.deb drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2001-04-12 15:41:33 ./ drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2001-04-12 15:41:29 ./usr/ drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2001-04-12 15:41:28 ./usr/bin/ drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2001-04-12 15:41:30 ./usr/share/ drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2001-04-12 15:41:29 ./usr/share/doc/ drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2001-04-12 15:41:32 ./usr/share/doc/s25manager/ -rw-r--r-- root/root 289 2001-02-03 19:26:38 ./usr/share/doc/s25manager/README -rw-r--r-- root/root 191 2001-04-08 21:00:18 ./usr/share/doc/s25manager/README.Debian -rw-r--r-- root/root 513 2001-04-08 21:19:14 ./usr/share/doc/s25manager/copyright -rw-r--r-- root/root 212 2001-04-08 21:49:47 ./usr/share/doc/s25manager/changelog.Debian.gz drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2001-04-12 15:41:30 ./usr/share/man/ drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2001-04-12 15:41:32 ./usr/share/man/man1/ -rw-r--r-- root/root 961 2001-04-08 22:41:06 ./usr/share/man/man1/s25manager.1.gz drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2001-04-12 15:41:29 ./usr/lib/ drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2001-04-12 15:41:29 ./usr/lib/menu/ -rw-r--r-- root/root 102 2001-04-08 22:17:59 ./usr/lib/menu/s25manager Anyone knows why ? I'm totally clueless. Attached is debian/rules -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] #!/usr/bin/make -f # GNU copyright 1997 to 1999 by Joey Hess. # GNU copyright 2000 by Eric Van Buggenhaut. # Uncomment this to turn on verbose mode. #export DH_VERBOSE=1 # This is the debhelper compatability version to use. export DH_COMPAT=2 configure: configure-stamp configure-stamp: dh_testdir # Add here commands to configure the package. touch configure-stamp build: configure-stamp build-stamp build-stamp: dh_testdir # Add here commands to compile the package. #/usr/bin/docbook-to-man debian/s25manager.sgml s25manager.1 touch build-stamp clean: dh_testdir dh_testroot rm -f build-stamp configure-stamp # Add here commands to clean up after the build process. dh_clean install: build dh_testdir dh_testroot dh_clean -k dh_installdirs # Add here commands to install the package into debian/s25manager. install -d debian/tmp/usr/bin install -m755 -o root -g root s25manager debian/tmp/usr/bin/s25manager # Build architecture-independent files here. binary-indep: build install dh_testversion 2 dh_testdir dh_testroot # dh_installdebconf dh_installdocs # dh_installexamples dh_installmenu # dh_installemacsen # dh_installpam # dh_installinit # dh_installcron dh_installmanpages dh_undocumented dh_installchangelogs # dh_link # dh_strip dh_compress dh_fixperms # You may want to make some executables suid here. # dh_suidregister # dh_makeshlibs dh_installdeb # dh_shlibdeps dh_gencontrol dh_md5sums dh_builddeb # Build architecture-dependent files here. binary-arch: build install # We have nothing to do here. binary: binary-indep binary-arch .PHONY: build clean binary-indep binary-arch binary install configure
Re: i have a problem with making a .deb file
On Fri, Apr 06, 2001 at 01:05:40AM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote: On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 11:58:31PM +0200, Christian SPENER wrote: [...] when i look into into the deb file, under CONTENTS there are this dirs bin usr share What is CONTENTS? How do you look into the deb file? You can look into .deb files using mc :-) -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dpkg-source unhappy
On Sun, Apr 15, 2001 at 11:18:05PM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote:
On Thu, Apr 12, 2001 at 04:38:54AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here is the problem. First you should stop the line wrap. Ending the
paragraph with ... makes dpkg-source think that a second paragraph is
forthcoming. Remove the 3 periods.
Thanks for your reply. It didn't help though (or I misunderstood you).
Here's
the new debian/control file :
$less debian/s25manager-0.82/debian/control
Source: s25manager
Section: main/comm
Priority: optional
Maintainer: Eric Van Buggenhaut [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Build-Depends: debhelper ( 2.0.0)
Standards-Version: 3.2.1
Package: s25manager
Architecture: all
Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}, tcl8.2
Description: Siemens S25 cell phone GUI manager
S25manager is a GUI manager for the S25 series (S25, M35, M35i, etc)
Siemens cell phones. It backs up and restores phonebooks, upload logos and
midi files, etc.
You should hard wrap the description field at 78 characters:
Description: Siemens S25 cell phone GUI manager
S25manager is a GUI manager for the S25 series (S25, M35, M35i, etc)
Siemens cell phones. It backs up and restores phonebooks, upload
logos and midi files, etc.
But dpkg-buildpackage reports the same problem
[...]
dpkg-source -b s25manager-0.82
dpkg-source: error: per-package paragraph 2 in control info file is missing
Package line
Can you check that you haven't put blank lines at the end of the file?
[...]
Well done : there was a blank line at the end of file.
Thank you very much.
--
Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: shlibs:Depends
OK, thanks for this good piece of advice. On Fri, Apr 13, 2001 at 06:10:22PM -0700, Mike Markley wrote: On Fri, Apr 13, 2001 at 04:30:15PM -0800, Britton [EMAIL PROTECTED] spake forth: It actually works with tcl 8.0, 8.1 and 8.2 you are right. So what about : Depends: tcl8.0 | tcl8.1 | tcl8.2 Or mayby just depend on a version greater than 8.0, as you do with debhelper in you build depend. But Mayby tcl breaks backward compatability a lot and you thing it would be better without that, sort of a judgement call I guess. hat type=Tcl maintainer Couple of problems with this... 1) tcl8.1 doesn't exist in Debian 2) tcl breaks backwards compatability a *lot* 3) because of #2, there are separate packages for 8.0, 8.2, and 8.3; therefore, a simple Depends: tcl (= 8.0) will not work. All in all, Depends: tclsh | tcl8.2 should generally work for straightforward scripts, as the language doesn't tend to change that much between releases, just the API for the library and various internals. All of the tcl packages Provide: tclsh, so that'll work for scripts which don't have any insanity preventing them from working with all modern TCLs. Note that lintian complains about depending only on a virtual package, and while a quick glance doesn't find language in policy which forbids it, that is just a quick glance ;). /hat -- Mike Markley [EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG: 0x3B047084 7FC7 0DC0 EF31 DF83 7313 FE2B 77A8 F36A 3B04 7084 Logic and practical information do not seem to apply here. You admit that? To deny the facts would be illogical, Doctor - Spock and McCoy, A Piece of the Action, stardate unknown -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Building dynamic libraries.
Is there a ref doc about building packages of dynamic libraries ? -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Searching for sponsor....
If you say where your packages are, I can have a look at multiseti. On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 02:18:17PM +0200, Vlatko Kosturjak wrote: Hi! Greetz from Croatia! I'm searching for a sponsor. I've made some packages which I would like to maintain for Debian I made Debian packages for my following programs: multiseti - multiseti utility for managing multiple seti at home packets xplsisnjasp - plugin for xmms which provides lightshow via parport and I made package for program which is not mine: away - terminal locking program with additional capabilities Take care, -- E-mail: http://www.na.linux.hr/kost/mail.html * Vlatko Kosturjak, KoSt Web: http://www.k0st.com * PGP key can be found there too * ICQ: 3631122 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Adopting packages
I regularly receive WNPP report. List is divided in 2 : - orphaned packages. - packages up for adoption. I still haven't catched the subtle difference between those 2 titles. Packages of what list may I adopt ? As non-english speaker, I find it obvious that an orphaned package has to be adopted, so what's the point ? -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [users] Re: Where's lame
On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 09:53:44PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote: On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 03:19:21PM -0400, MaD dUCK wrote: hi developers, this is my first message, i hope it's appropriate. there's talk going on on the users mailing list about lame and its absence from the package tree. i would like to adopt the lame mp3 encoder as a debian package and was wondering if there are any objections? is there already a maintainer? can this packet be debianized? It can be debianised, but it can't be included in debian, since it can't be legally redistributed in binary form. What do you mean ?? There are lots of packages included in debian in source form ... femto:~[0]# apt-cache search --names-only src [...] psp-samples-src - Perl Server Pages - Sample source code sgb-src - Documentation for the Stanford GraphBase. src2tex - A converter from source program files to TeX format files tetex-src - teTeX texmf source files nvidia-glx-src - nVIDIA binary XFree86 4.X driver nvidia-kernel-src - nVIDIA binary kernel module dot-forward-src - .forward-compatibility for qmail (source) ezmlm-src - easy-to-use high-speed mailing list manager for qmail (source) fastforward-src - aliases-style mail forwarding for qmail (source) mmix-src - Assembler and Simulator for Knuth's MMIX qmail-src - Source only package for building qmail binary package rblsmtpd-src - Source only package for building rblsmtpd binary package serialmail-src - tools for passing mail across serial links (source) ucspi-tcp-src - Source only package for building ucspi-tcp binary package -- Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [users] Re: Where's lame
On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 08:43:46AM -0500, Christian T. Steigies wrote: [...] It can be debianised, but it can't be included in debian, since it can't be legally redistributed in binary form. What do you mean ?? There are lots of packages included in debian in source form ... Why don't you read the webpage??? Why does everything have to be exlained again and again when somebody made the effort and explained it on a webpage? wnpp ist the first page you should look at when you want to package something. And its been there for ages, not really hard to find. I wasn't referring to lame, i was just answering the above-mentioned assertion : it can't be included in debian, since it can't be legally redistributed in binary form. First part of the sentence might be correct, but not for *that* reason. -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Packaging of Misterhouse
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 01:05:32PM -0400, Mabe, David, M (Dave) wrote: Debian-Mentors: I am working on packaging Misterhouse (http://www.misterhouse.net), a home automation program written entirely in perl. This program has no makefile for installing, you just unzip, untar and go. Question 1: Will I have to change the install routine to use 'make' even though it is not really needed, or can I somehow have dpkg just copy the text files to the appropriate directories? No, you can simply copy the script in the install: target. See attach a debian/rules file for a tcl script i'm maintaining. Also, this program makes use of several shared scripts that are eval'ed by the misterhouse engine when the program is run. Users of the program write their own and usually store these in a private directory and use some that come with the distribution. These can be thought of as config files, but I doubt they should go under /etc. Question 2: Where should the user-defined scripts go so they will survive upgrades ? user-defined stuff usually go into home directory. Don't you want to ? -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Packaging of Misterhouse
Well, here's the attachment :-) -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] #!/usr/bin/make -f # GNU copyright 1997 to 1999 by Joey Hess. # GNU copyright 2000 by Eric Van Buggenhaut. # Uncomment this to turn on verbose mode. #export DH_VERBOSE=1 # This is the debhelper compatability version to use. export DH_COMPAT=2 configure: configure-stamp configure-stamp: dh_testdir # Add here commands to configure the package. touch configure-stamp build: configure-stamp build-stamp build-stamp: dh_testdir # Add here commands to compile the package. #/usr/bin/docbook-to-man debian/s25manager.sgml s25manager.1 touch build-stamp clean: dh_testdir dh_testroot rm -f build-stamp configure-stamp # Add here commands to clean up after the build process. dh_clean install: build dh_testdir dh_testroot dh_clean -k dh_installdirs # Add here commands to install the package into debian/s25manager. install -d debian/s25manager/usr/bin install -m755 -o root -g root s25manager debian/s25manager/usr/bin/s25manager # Build architecture-independent files here. binary-indep: build install dh_testdir dh_testroot # dh_installdebconf dh_installdocs # dh_installexamples dh_installmenu # dh_installemacsen # dh_installpam # dh_installinit # dh_installcron dh_installmanpages dh_undocumented dh_installchangelogs # dh_link # dh_strip dh_compress dh_fixperms # You may want to make some executables suid here. # dh_suidregister # dh_makeshlibs dh_installdeb # dh_shlibdeps dh_gencontrol dh_md5sums dh_builddeb # Build architecture-dependent files here. binary-arch: build install # We have nothing to do here. binary: binary-indep binary-arch .PHONY: build clean binary-indep binary-arch binary install configure
Re: 2 packages sharing the same config file.
On Mon, May 21, 2001 at 03:55:42PM +0200, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote: Domenico Andreoli [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: maybe using an abacus-common package which owns that conffile... my question now is, is a file worth of a package on its own?!? Nope. Why not just leave the packages conflicting until someone with a real need to have both installed stands up? Well :-) This is the message I got from A. Bunk who handed me the package : It's your package. One thing you could do when you start working on it is to remove the conflict between xabacus and xmabacus - there are better solutions in Debian when two packages share the same file. cu Adrian I'm just looking for the 'better solutions' he mentions but still clueless. Any hint ? -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 2 packages sharing the same config file.
On Tue, May 22, 2001 at 10:11:48PM -0700, Brett Cundal wrote: On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 03:06:26AM +0200, Eric Van Buggenhaut wrote: This is the message I got from A. Bunk who handed me the package : It's your package. One thing you could do when you start working on it is to remove the conflict between xabacus and xmabacus - there are better solutions in Debian when two packages share the same file. cu Adrian I'm just looking for the 'better solutions' he mentions but still clueless. Any hint ? I don't know the details here, but can't you just modify the package to use seperate config files for each binary so they no longer conflict? The only other thing I can think of is to put the common files in one package and have the other dependant on it... That might not be a good solution though. Thank for your comment. Answer to your question is : probably not, the 2 binary files do the same thing. The only difference is that they are built against different libraries (motif/non-motif). The config file just sets thing like the size of the abacus, etc. That's why we use 1 config file for both versions. Just wanted to throw that out for comment... Any comment is always welcomme :-) -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 2 packages sharing the same config file.
On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 09:30:13PM +0300, Sami Haahtinen wrote:
On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 03:06:26AM +0200, Eric Van Buggenhaut wrote:
I'm just looking for the 'better solutions' he mentions but still clueless.
Any hint ?
for lib{pam,nss}-ldap i used debconf to share the common data, and just made
the packages use renamed config files.
it makes things easy for the user when (s)he enters the data once and it's
re-used in the other package too. This just leaves you with the situation
where
you need to have a way to configure the packages differently too.
OK, I'll have a look at your packages, thanks.
--
Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 2 packages sharing the same config file.
On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 02:49:03PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: Eric Van Buggenhaut wrote: It's your package. One thing you could do when you start working on it is to remove the conflict between xabacus and xmabacus - there are better solutions in Debian when two packages share the same file. cu Adrian I'm just looking for the 'better solutions' he mentions but still clueless. Any hint ? One possibility would be to not use a conffile, but generate the conffile in your postinst if it does not exist. This still leaves open the question about how you figure out it's safe to remove the conffile. The packages would each have to remove it on purge iff the other package was already purged. It seems the best solution indeed. Is there a way to know if a package has been purged ? dpkg --test-purge ? -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Package mailfilter
If you haven't found anyone let me know and I'll sponsor your package. On Mon, Jun 25, 2001 at 10:26:29AM +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi I build the Package for mailfilter and need a sponsor now to get it into the Debian Archiv. (Don Kennedy started working on it, he also filed a bug against wnpp (#101152) but he cancelled working on it (one mailfilter package is enough :) ). I already asked one to act as a sponsor but he has to much to do, so i ask here now. Mailfilter is very flexible utility for UNIX (-like) operating systems to get rid of unwanted e-mail messages, before having to go through the trouble of downloading them to the local computer. It offers support for one or many POP3 accounts and is especially useful for dialup connections via modem, ISDN, etc. Install Mailfilter if you'd like to remove spam from your POP3 mail accounts. With Mailfilter you can define your own filters (rules) to determine which e-mails should be delivered and which are considered waste. Rules are Regular Expressions, so you can make use of familiar options from other mail delivery programs such as e.g. procmail. If you do not get your Mail from a POP3-Server you don't need Mailfilter. More Info about mailfilter is at http://mailfilter.sourceforge.net and my Debian-Package is at ftp://goliathbbs.dnsalias.net/debian/mailfilter - -- bye Joerg GPG-Keyid: 0x1120D31B Fingerprint: A3D2 83A4 535D A826 F2AA 4348 8BDD 849C 1120 D31B -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE7NvW1i92EnBEg0xsRAkGYAJ9AAWp3Wd2UU/qf4WwHKCiVWi4RggCfcn36 ZR44pj+krrHyJVQYDRn8kjs= =9Xie -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
unexpected permissions
I build a package tonite and I got wrong permissions on files : [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/debian]$ ls -ld multiseti_0.6.0-3* -rw---1 eric eric 1913 jun 27 02:48 multiseti_0.6.0-3.diff.gz -rw-r--r--1 eric eric 620 jun 27 02:48 multiseti_0.6.0-3.dsc -rw-r--r--1 eric eric 974 jun 27 02:48 multiseti_0.6.0-3_i386.changes -rw---1 eric eric11022 jun 27 02:48 multiseti_0.6.0-3_i386.deb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/debian]$ Obviously files were created with perm 600 (changed to 660 when signed). I first thought it was a umask problem, but recompiled another package : [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/debian]$ ls -ld crafty_18.9* -rw-r--r--1 eric eric 1000179 jun 27 02:51 crafty_18.9-1.diff.gz -rw-r--r--1 eric eric 638 jun 27 02:55 crafty_18.9-1.dsc -rw-r--r--1 eric eric 1144 jun 27 02:55 crafty_18.9-1_i386.changes -rw-r--r--1 eric eric 2141118 jun 27 02:53 crafty_18.9-1_i386.deb -rw-r--r--1 eric eric 359356 jun 5 00:40 crafty_18.9.orig.tar.gz And this one is OK !? Any hint welcomme. Thanks. -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: binary-all packaging
On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 03:13:31AM +0200, Robert Millan wrote: Hello, I'm on my first package. The upstream people provide just a perl script which should go to /usr/bin. I'm reading the instructions of the maintainer's guide (/usr/share/doc/maint-guide/) and all the steps and examples are desgned for creatinga binary package from a source tarball. I've tried to configure this file myself, but when i issue the command 'dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot' i always get the same error: dpkg-genchanges: failure: cannot read files list file: No such file or directory What am i doing wrong? I guess i have a problem in my rules file. just in case i post it here too: --./debian/rules #!/usr/bin/make -f # Sample debian/rules that uses debhelper. # GNU copyright 1997 to 1999 by Joey Hess. # Uncomment this to turn on verbose mode. #export DH_VERBOSE=1 # This is the debhelper compatability version to use. export DH_COMPAT=1 This isn't the solution to your problem, but FYI you should go DH_COMPAT=2 at least build: clean: install: dh_testdir dh_testroot # Add here commands to install the package into debian/tmp. mkdir -p `pwd`/debian/tmp/usr/bin /bin/cp `pwd`/esms `pwd`/debian/tmp/usr/bin/ # Build architecture-independent files here. binary-indep: build install # We have nothing to do by default. # Build architecture-dependent files here. binary-arch: build install binary: binary-indep binary-arch .PHONY: build clean binary-indep binary-arch binary install --EOF thanks-- Robert MillanDebian GNU user zeratul2 wanadoo eshttp://getyouriso.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: binary-all packaging
Looks like your debian/rules is missing some important stuff. Here's one of mines, have a look at it, it's a tcl/tk script, no compilation. On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 03:13:31AM +0200, Robert Millan wrote: Hello, I'm on my first package. The upstream people provide just a perl script which should go to /usr/bin. I'm reading the instructions of the maintainer's guide (/usr/share/doc/maint-guide/) and all the steps and examples are desgned for creatinga binary package from a source tarball. I've tried to configure this file myself, but when i issue the command 'dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot' i always get the same error: dpkg-genchanges: failure: cannot read files list file: No such file or directory What am i doing wrong? I guess i have a problem in my rules file. just in case i post it here too: --./debian/rules #!/usr/bin/make -f # Sample debian/rules that uses debhelper. # GNU copyright 1997 to 1999 by Joey Hess. # Uncomment this to turn on verbose mode. #export DH_VERBOSE=1 # This is the debhelper compatability version to use. export DH_COMPAT=1 build: clean: install: dh_testdir dh_testroot # Add here commands to install the package into debian/tmp. mkdir -p `pwd`/debian/tmp/usr/bin /bin/cp `pwd`/esms `pwd`/debian/tmp/usr/bin/ # Build architecture-independent files here. binary-indep: build install # We have nothing to do by default. # Build architecture-dependent files here. binary-arch: build install binary: binary-indep binary-arch .PHONY: build clean binary-indep binary-arch binary install --EOF thanks-- Robert MillanDebian GNU user zeratul2 wanadoo eshttp://getyouriso.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] #!/usr/bin/make -f # GNU copyright 1997 to 1999 by Joey Hess. # GNU copyright 2000 by Eric Van Buggenhaut. # Uncomment this to turn on verbose mode. #export DH_VERBOSE=1 # This is the debhelper compatability version to use. export DH_COMPAT=2 configure: configure-stamp configure-stamp: dh_testdir # Add here commands to configure the package. touch configure-stamp build: configure-stamp build-stamp build-stamp: dh_testdir # Add here commands to compile the package. #/usr/bin/docbook-to-man debian/s25manager.sgml s25manager.1 touch build-stamp clean: dh_testdir dh_testroot rm -f build-stamp configure-stamp # Add here commands to clean up after the build process. dh_clean install: build dh_testdir dh_testroot dh_clean -k dh_installdirs # Add here commands to install the package into debian/s25manager. install -d debian/s25manager/usr/bin install -m755 -o root -g root s25manager debian/s25manager/usr/bin/s25manager # Build architecture-independent files here. binary-indep: build install dh_testdir dh_testroot # dh_installdebconf dh_installdocs # dh_installexamples dh_installmenu # dh_installemacsen # dh_installpam # dh_installinit # dh_installcron dh_installmanpages dh_undocumented dh_installchangelogs # dh_link # dh_strip dh_compress dh_fixperms # You may want to make some executables suid here. # dh_suidregister # dh_makeshlibs dh_installdeb # dh_shlibdeps dh_gencontrol dh_md5sums dh_builddeb # Build architecture-dependent files here. binary-arch: build install # We have nothing to do here. binary: binary-indep binary-arch .PHONY: build clean binary-indep binary-arch binary install configure
Re: debconf and daemons
On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 04:00:47AM +1000, Sam Johnston wrote: Hello all, I'm trying my hand at a somewhat more challenging package this time, which uses debconf to extract a username and password from the user whichi is stored in a config file in /etc and used to start a daemon (specifically a login client). I've got a couple of problems though: - debconf doesn't append '|| true' to the init.d stop in prerm. this means that when start-stop-daemon returns 1 the removal/upgrade fails miserably if the daemon isn't running or can't be stopped. imho this is broken (although it may be better than removing a package under a daemon that refuses to stop?). how do i get around this? ignore it? - install -m 600 myfile /etc/myfile doesn't set the permissions appropriately (?) Why do u want perm 600 ? dh_fixperms should automatically fix perms of files correctly. - debconf was surprisingly easy... however creating the config files once the information has been obtained wasn't. i would have liked to have filled in a template but ended up doing 'echo key value /etc/myfile'. is there a 'standard' way of doing this? perhaps i should be using perl and text::template? Any assistance would be most appreciated, - samj -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: error when building package
On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 01:08:44AM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
Hello,
when i run dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot to create a package, i get the
following error:
dpkg-deb: parse error, in file `debian/esms/DEBIAN/control' near line 6
package `esms':
`Depends' field, missing package name, or garbage where package name expected
dh_builddeb: command returned error code
while my debian/esms/DEBIAN/control file looks correct:
Package: esms
Version: 0.8.5-1
Section: comm
Priority: optional
Architecture: i386
Depends: ,perl-base, libwww-perl
Looks correct ??
Suggests: fortune
Installed-Size: 44
Maintainer: Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Description: [...]
[...]
and so does my debian/control file:
Source: esms
Section: comm
Priority: optional
Maintainer: Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Standards-Version: 3.0.1
Package: esms
Architecture: any
Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}, perl-base, libwww-perl
Suggests: fortune
Description: [...]
[...]
note that i have tried putting perl-base, libwww-perl before
${shlibs:Depends} to avoid that strange comma and yet didn't work.
--
Robert MillanDebian GNU user
zeratul2 wanadoo eshttp://getyouriso.org/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: GPG Key Signing (Was: Advocate/Sponsor)
On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 10:27:54AM -0700, John H. Robinson, IV wrote: On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 12:13:37PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote: we should also require them to demonstrate a clear understanding of PKI as part of the NM process. manoj came up with a pretty good protocol to sign a key. i have it available in HTML at http://people.debian.org/~jaqque/keysign.html it does have some weaknesses, but it is a lot stronger than the ``oh, i've met you, i have checked your ID, and off we go'' comments welcome. Nice to see you called it 'Manoj's Singing-Protocol' ;) -john -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: missing file in my package
What DH_COMPAT are you using ? PD : tienes tu clave firmada ya ? On Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 02:13:31PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote: Hello, I'm having some trouble in packaging a program called esms. It only consists of a single binary-all (perl) file that must go on /usr/bin/esms. The problem is that the package is created without it, here's a snapshot of an alienized package: bash-2.03$ tar -xvzf esms-0.9.0-2.tgz ./ ./usr/ ./usr/bin/ ./usr/share/ ./usr/share/doc/ ./usr/share/doc/esms/ ./usr/share/doc/esms/copyright ./usr/share/doc/esms/changelog.Debian.gz bash-2.03$ Here is the (IMHO) relevant part of my debian/rules file: install: build dh_testdir dh_testroot dh_clean -k dh_installdirs # Add here commands to install the package into debian/tmp. install -d debian/tmp/usr/bin install -m755 -o root -g root `pwd`/esms `pwd`/debian/tmp/usr/bin/esms If i missed some information let me know and i'll post it here. Thanks, -- Robert MillanDebian GNU (Hurd) user zeratul2 wanadoo eshttp://getyouriso.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Re: missing file in my package
On Mon, Jul 09, 2001 at 01:55:35AM +0200, Robert Millan wrote: On Mon, 9 Jul 2001 01:04:49 +0200, Eric Van Buggenhaut [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What DH_COMPAT are you using ? I was using DH_COMPAT=2 as you told me in another question, now i've been told that when using the debian/tmp directory i need DH_COMPAT=1 (i noticed you are using debian/package_name directory). So don't worry it's working right now and i've finally made the package. This isn't your best move. You *should* use DH_COMPAT=2 and install the files in debian/package_name When this is corrected, I can have a look at your package and upload it. -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
openacs docs version number
Hi, I recently adopted openacs package. Upstream FTP site provides 2 packages : openacs-3.2.5.tar.gz and openacs-3.2.5-docs.tar.gz. How should I version-number the doc package ? Would openacs-docs_1.0 be OK or shoud I try to stick to binaries package version for now and the future ? Thanks. -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Unresolved symbol
On Tue, Jul 10, 2001 at 04:51:00PM +0530, sumit kalra wrote: Hi everybody, I'm learning to make kernel modules and am currently working on a block device driver. I had installed kernel version 2.2.16-22 (RH - 7.0) and then changed it to 2.2.16 (downloaded from kernel.org). FYI, this is a Debian mailing list. Maybe you could post to Suse lists. -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
dpkg can't purge init script
Sorry for cross-posting, I posted to the wrong list first. I can't purge a package : curitiba_POTATO:/# dpkg --purge superviser-server (Reading database ... 9401 files and directories currently installed.) Removing superviser-server ... Stopping superviser-server: dpkg: error processing superviser-server (--purge): subprocess pre-removal script returned error exit status 1 update-rc.d: /etc/init.d/superviser-server exists during rc.d purge (use -f to force) dpkg: error while cleaning up: subprocess post-installation script returned error exit status 1 Errors were encountered while processing: superviser-server curitiba_POTATO:/# ls -l /etc/init.d/superviser-server -rwxr-xr-x1 root root 1945 Jul 27 11:10 /etc/init.d/superviser-server curitiba_POTATO:/# Here comes the script : [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/arturo/superviser-server-1.0]$ more debian/prerm #! /bin/sh # prerm script for superviser-server # # see: dh_installdeb(1) set -e # summary of how this script can be called: #* prerm `remove' #* old-prerm `upgrade' new-version #* new-prerm `failed-upgrade' old-version #* conflictor's-prerm `remove' `in-favour' package new-version #* deconfigured's-prerm `deconfigure' `in-favour' # package-being-installed version `removing' # conflicting-package version # for details, see /usr/doc/packaging-manual/ case $1 in remove|upgrade|deconfigure) # install-info --quiet --remove /usr/info/superviser-server.info.gz ;; failed-upgrade) ;; *) echo prerm called with unknown argument \`$1' 2 exit 0 ;; esac # dh_installdeb will replace this with shell code automatically # generated by other debhelper scripts. #DEBHELPER# exit 0 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/arturo/superviser-server-1.0]$ And the debhelper script : [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/arturo/superviser-server-1.0]$ more debian/prerm.debhelper # Automatically added by dh_installdocs if [ \( $1 = upgrade -o $1 = remove \) -a -L /usr/doc/superviser-server ]; then rm -f /usr/doc/superviser-server fi # End automatically added section # Automatically added by dh_installinit /etc/init.d/superviser-server stop # End automatically added section [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/arturo/superviser-server-1.0]$ Is this a bug in debhelper ? -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT \_|_/ Andago \/ \/ Av. Santa Engracia num 54 a n d a g o |--Telef: 91-2041100 /\___/\ http://www.andago.com / | \ Innovando en Internet [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dpkg can't purge init script
On Thu, Aug 23, 2001 at 12:05:01AM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote: On Wed, Aug 22, 2001 at 07:44:29PM +0200, Eric Van Buggenhaut wrote: I can't purge a package : curitiba_POTATO:/# dpkg --purge superviser-server (Reading database ... 9401 files and directories currently installed.) Removing superviser-server ... Stopping superviser-server: dpkg: error processing superviser-server (--purge): subprocess pre-removal script returned error exit status 1 [BTW, should the package be called supervisOr-server?] So it looks as though the superviser-server init.d stop script exited with exit status 1 instead of 0. Here comes the script : [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/arturo/superviser-server-1.0]$ more debian/prerm #! /bin/sh # prerm script for superviser-server # # see: dh_installdeb(1) set -e so it will exist on any error... case $1 in remove|upgrade|deconfigure) # install-info --quiet --remove /usr/info/superviser-server.info.gz ;; failed-upgrade) ;; *) echo prerm called with unknown argument \`$1' 2 exit 0 This should probably be exit 1. Well, my script is the exact copy of the skeleton found in /usr/share/debhelper/dh_make/debian/prerm.ex where it is exit 0 ;; esac # dh_installdeb will replace this with shell code automatically # generated by other debhelper scripts. #DEBHELPER# exit 0 And the debhelper script : [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/arturo/superviser-server-1.0]$ more debian/prerm.debhelper # Automatically added by dh_installdocs if [ \( $1 = upgrade -o $1 = remove \) -a -L /usr/doc/superviser-server ]; then rm -f /usr/doc/superviser-server fi # End automatically added section OK there. # Automatically added by dh_installinit /etc/init.d/superviser-server stop # End automatically added section And that's OK, _as long as /etc/init.d/superviser-server stop returns with a zero exit status_. Is this a bug in debhelper ? Doesn't appear to be. Check that /etc/init.d/superviser-server uses the correct exit status. Again, /etc/init.d/superviser-server is a copy of the skeleton found in /usr/share/debhelper/debian/init.d.ex : [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~]$ diff -u /usr/share/debhelper/dh_make/debian/init.d.ex chroot/potato/home/eric/arturo/superviser-server-1.0/debian/init.d --- /usr/share/debhelper/dh_make/debian/init.d.ex Wed Mar 14 22:25:48 2001 +++ chroot/potato/home/eric/arturo/superviser-server-1.0/debian/init.d Fri Jul 27 13:10:59 2001 @@ -9,12 +9,14 @@ # # Version: @(#)skeleton 1.8 03-Mar-1998 [EMAIL PROTECTED] # -# This file was automatically customized by dh-make on #DATE# +# This file was automatically customized by dh-make on Fri, 27 Jul 2001 11:27:34 +0200 +# +# Modified for superviser-server by Eric Van Buggenhaut [EMAIL PROTECTED] -PATH=/sbin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin -DAEMON=/usr/sbin/#PACKAGE# -NAME=#PACKAGE# -DESC=#PACKAGE# +PATH=/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/sbin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin +DAEMON=/usr/sbin/superviser-server.pl +NAME=superviser-server +DESC=superviser-server test -f $DAEMON || exit 0 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~]$ Problem seems to be that prerm remove fails : curitiba_POTATO:/# /var/lib/dpkg/info/superviser-server.prerm remove ; echo $? Stopping superviser-server: 1 curitiba_POTATO:/# Because : curitiba_POTATO:/# start-stop-daemon --stop --quiet --pidfile /var/run/superviser-server.pid --exec /usr/sbin/superviser-server.pl ; echo $? 1 curitiba_POTATO:/# If you have any idea ... Thanks for your help anyway. PS : I'll move this thread to -mentors, where it belongs to -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT Real Programers don't use Pascal \_|_/ Andago \/ \/ Av. Santa Engracia num 54 a n d a g o |--Telef: 91-2041100 /\___/\ http://www.andago.com / | \ Innovando en Internet [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dpkg can't purge init script
On Wed, Aug 22, 2001 at 10:28:42PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote: On Wed, Aug 22, 2001 at 09:24:02PM +0200, Eric Van Buggenhaut wrote: Sorry for cross-posting, I posted to the wrong list first. I can't purge a package : [...] Clearly the thing that is returning 1 lies in the debhelper prerm. And the debhelper script : [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/arturo/superviser-server-1.0]$ more debian/prerm.debhelper # Automatically added by dh_installdocs if [ \( $1 = upgrade -o $1 = remove \) -a -L /usr/doc/superviser-server ]; then rm -f /usr/doc/superviser-server rm -f always returns 0, not that. fi # End automatically added section # Automatically added by dh_installinit /etc/init.d/superviser-server stop That's the only thing it could be. Your init.d script is failing and returning 1. It is bugged, fix it. Hint: --oknodo parameter to start-stop-daemon (look it up). OK, --oknodo did the trick. Thanks. I don't see the point why this option isn't shipped in the default file. -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: place of ldconfig in postinst
On Thu, Nov 01, 2001 at 08:18:20PM -0800, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote: On 01-Nov-2001 Eric Van Buggenhaut wrote: Hi, I'm building my first packages with shared library. This is what my postinst states: Lintian is a collection of stupid shell scripts. It tries to catch thr common cases and does a pretty good job. My best suggestion is to write your code in the style of most of the other scripts and everyone is happy. This isn't 'my' code, it's an almost exact copy of /usr/share/debhelper/dh_make/debian/postinst.ex So I'd expect it to be 'in the style of most of the other scripts'. This is no different from working with a bunch of coders and everyone agreeing on a common code formatting. Talk to the maintainer of debhelper ? -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: place of ldconfig in postinst
On Thu, Nov 01, 2001 at 10:56:25AM -0500, Steve M. Robbins wrote: On Thu, Nov 01, 2001 at 04:00:34PM +0100, Eric Van Buggenhaut wrote: Hi, I'm building my first packages with shared library. This is what my postinst states: case $1 in configure) ldconfig ;; abort-upgrade|abort-remove|abort-deconfigure) ;; *) echo postinst called with unknown argument \`$1' 2 By the way, if you use the debhelper scripts (dh_makeshlibs in particular) , you don't need to write the postinst by hand, and as a bonus, lintian will not complain about it. OK, done ! -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Package review
Please inform the administrators of your server (www.cbu.edu) that their router is broken. It rejects ECN enabled. On Mon, Oct 29, 2001 at 12:52:18PM -0600, Warren Turkal wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Could someone please take a look at my package for uml at: http://www.cbu.edu/~wturkal/debian/ Warren - -- GPG Fingerprint: 30C8 BDF1 B133 14CB 832F 2C5D 99A1 A19F 559D 9E88 GPG Public Key @ http://www.cbu.edu/~wturkal/wturkal.gpg -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE73aVnmaGhn1WdnogRAkQTAJ48avRruokN88AYPCZkUIutRshdEACePaOd eELhEzDxa2gxPvTJwCjujzY= =ek78 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: place of ldconfig in postinst
On Fri, Nov 02, 2001 at 10:17:36AM -0800, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote: This is no different from working with a bunch of coders and everyone agreeing on a common code formatting. Talk to the maintainer of debhelper ? dh_make is NOT maintained by Joey Hess, the debhelper maint. In fact he has nothing to do with it. Oh, sorry. I was confused by the fact that the maintainer's scripts were kept under /usr/share/debhelper. Should we ask Craig Small [EMAIL PROTECTED] to sync those .ex files with Lintian ? -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
changing a package Architecture:
Hi,
I just adopted a package which is nothing but a Perl script. Previous
maitainer built it using
Architecture: any
when it had to be
Architecture: all
(correct me if I'm wrong)
Now that I'm uploading a new version of package with correct Architecture,
should I ask ftp-master
to remove the *{i386,m68,arm}.deb files ? or is it automatic ?
Thanks.
--
Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
place of ldconfig in postinst
Hi, I'm building my first packages with shared library. This is what my postinst states: case $1 in configure) ldconfig ;; abort-upgrade|abort-remove|abort-deconfigure) ;; *) echo postinst called with unknown argument \`$1' 2 Still lintian complains about: W: iiwusynth: postinst-unsafe-ldconfig N: N: The postinst script calls ldconfig unsafely. The postinst must only N: call ldconfig when given the argument configure. N: N: Refer to Policy Manual, chapter 9 for details. Sorry, I don't get it ! -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
no shlibdeps in DEBIAN/control
Since some days, when building packages, I don't have libc6 version
included anymore. dpkg-deb then complains:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/gdm-2.2.2.1]$ less debian/tmp/DEBIAN/control
Package: gdm
Version: 2.2.2.1-ximian.12linex6
Section: x11
Priority: optional
Architecture: i386
Depends: , libpam-modules (= 0.72-1), adduser, xutils | xbase-clients,
gdm-cleaner
because of that. debian/control is fine though :
[...]
Package: gdm
Architecture: any
Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}, libpam-modules (= 0.72-1), adduser,
xutils | xbase-clients, gdm-cleaner
Suggests: xsm, locales
Conflicts: wdm, xdm, kdm
[...]
So what's the problem ?
Please Cc me.
--
Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT Los niños son esponjas
(Amaya Rodrigo Sastre)
\_|_/ Andago
\/ \/ Av. Santa Engracia, 54
a n d a g o |--E-28010 Madrid - tfno:+34(91)2041100
/\___/\ http://www.andago.com
/ | \ Innovando en Internet
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: no shlibdeps in DEBIAN/control
On Mon, Dec 10, 2001 at 07:03:25PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote: Eric Van Buggenhaut: Depends: , libpam-modules (= 0.72-1), adduser, xutils | xbase-clients, gdm-cleaner Are you sure you run dpkg-shlibdeps (or debhelper equivalent) on the ELF binaries in debian/rules? Hola Santi, This is what my debian/rules looks like: binary-arch: install-stamp dh_testdir dh_testroot dh_installdirs dh_movefiles dh_installdocs dh_installinfo dh_installmenu dh_installpam dh_installexamples dh_installdebconf dh_installinit -r -n dh_installmanpages dh_undocumented dh_makeshlibs dh_perl dh_installchangelogs dh_installchangelogs ChangeLog dh_compress dh_fixperms dh_installdeb dh_shlibdeps dh_gencontrol if [ -d $(ARCHIVEDIR)/unstripped ]; then \ dh_md5sums; \ dh_builddeb --destdir=$(ARCHIVEDIR)/unstripped; \ I also think it's not a problem in the package tree, since the same problem happened 2 weeks ago with another package. Thanks for your help, E. Please Cc me. -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT Los niños son esponjas (Amaya Rodrigo Sastre) \_|_/ Andago \/ \/ Av. Santa Engracia, 54 a n d a g o |--E-28010 Madrid - tfno:+34(91)2041100 /\___/\ http://www.andago.com / | \ Innovando en Internet [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: unversioned shared library
On Thu, Jun 20, 2002 at 01:10 +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote: Eric Van Buggenhaut [EMAIL PROTECTED] immo vero scripsit: I never made a separate packages for the lib part (no -dev either) cause the package is really small but now some other DD asks me for an extra package, containing the lib (+ another -dev package) because his own package depends on the same library. Upstream author never versioned his dynamic library. What am I supposed to do ? What soname should I use for the library ? See libpkg-guide for some help. adding something to: libwhatever_la_LDFLAGS = -export-dynamic -release @VERSION@ -version-info 0:0:0 to Makefile.am should create something reasonable for an unstable shared library, suggest using this for the upstream (if they do versioning at all). This doesn't work here: [EMAIL PROTECTED] automake Makefile.am:5: invalid unused variable name: `libiiwusynth_la_LDFLAGS' [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Makefile.am ## Process this file with automake to produce Makefile.in SUBDIRS = src EXTRA_DIST = TODO acconfig.h acinclude.m4 libiiwusynth_la_LDFLAGS = -export-dynamic -release @VERSION@ -version-info 0:0:0 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: unversioned shared library
On Thu, Jul 04, 2002 at 10:23 +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote: Eric Van Buggenhaut [EMAIL PROTECTED] immo vero scripsit: This doesn't work here: [EMAIL PROTECTED] automake Makefile.am:5: invalid unused variable name: `libiiwusynth_la_LDFLAGS' [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Makefile.am ## Process this file with automake to produce Makefile.in SUBDIRS = src EXTRA_DIST = TODO acconfig.h acinclude.m4 libiiwusynth_la_LDFLAGS = -export-dynamic -release @VERSION@ -version-info 0:0:0 [EMAIL PROTECTED] You're adding it to the wrong Makefile.am Add it somewhere with libiiwusynth_la_SOURCES are defined. Oh, silly me ! Thanks for the hint. -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
