On Mon, 18 Sep 2017 23:59:27 +0500 Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 02:14:17PM -0300, Breno Leitao wrote:
> > Thanks Roberto.
> >
> > wRar, do you still any concern about this package?
> Nope, uploaded. Thank you Roberto.
Thanks for uploading the package!
I saw in ftp-master [
On Sat, 9 Sep 2017 20:20:03 -0300 Roberto Oliveira
> > In that case please override this warning and write a comment describing
> > the reason.
> Fixed.
>
> > libopagent1 should be Section: libs.
> Fixed.
Thanks Roberto.
wRar, do you still any concern about this package?
On Sat, 9 Sep 2017 00:00:30 +0500 Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 08, 2017 at 03:48:10PM -0300, Roberto Oliveira wrote:
> > > W: oprofile-jit: package-has-unnecessary-activation-of-ldconfig-trigger
> > oprofile-jit installs a file under /etc/ld.so.conf.d/ that allows
> > oprofile finds the
On Fri, Sep 08, 2017 at 03:48:10PM -0300, Roberto Oliveira wrote:
> > W: oprofile-jit: package-has-unnecessary-activation-of-ldconfig-trigger
> oprofile-jit installs a file under /etc/ld.so.conf.d/ that allows
> oprofile finds the jvmti_oprofile when profiling Jited codes.
> So I think we need to a
Hi Andrey,
On Thu, 7 Sep 2017 22:33:48 +0500 Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> dpkg-gencontrol: warning: Depends field of package libopagent-dev: unknown
> substitution variable ${shlibs:Depends}
Fixed.
> I: oprofile source: duplicate-short-description libopagent1 libopagent-dev
Fixed.
> W: oprofil
dpkg-gencontrol: warning: Depends field of package libopagent-dev: unknown
substitution variable ${shlibs:Depends}
I: oprofile source: duplicate-short-description libopagent1 libopagent-dev
W: oprofile-jit: package-has-unnecessary-activation-of-ldconfig-trigger
W: libopagent-dev: wrong-section-ac
Hi Andrey,
On Sat, 2 Sep 2017 22:44:24 +0500 Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> libopagent.so should be in -dev.
Fixed.
> I think /etc/ld.so.conf.d/oprofile-jit.conf should be in oprofile-jit.
Fixed.
> I think you had a .symbols file for libopagent1, you should use it again.
Fixed. I'm using it again
libopagent.so should be in -dev.
I think /etc/ld.so.conf.d/oprofile-jit.conf should be in oprofile-jit.
I think you had a .symbols file for libopagent1, you should use it again.
You should use debian/tmp instead of . in find commands in d/rules.
Your .html files are size 0, because you haven't adju
Hi Andrey,
I found something wrong in the last version I sent, so I just sent a
new version.
So in case you already did a "dget -x", please, do it again.
Regards,
Roberto Oliveira.
Hi Andrey,
On Thu, 31 Aug 2017 22:52:12 +0500 Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> Please upgrade to the current Standards-Version.
Fixed.
> Why do you use "rm `find . -name "*.la"`" instead of "find . -name "*.la"
> -delete"?
Fixed
> Why do you ship static versions of the plugins?
Fixed. Don't need t
Please upgrade to the current Standards-Version.
Why do you use "rm `find . -name "*.la"`" instead of "find . -name "*.la"
-delete"?
Why do you ship static versions of the plugins?
README_PACKAGERS says "It is recommended to run ldconfig in %post and
%postun to add/remove the /oprofile path from t
Hi Andrey,
On Tue, 29 Aug 2017 23:52:48 +0500 Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 04:45:56PM -0300, Roberto Oliveira wrote:
> > > I still see a lot of old junk in debian/control:
> > > - did you write that Build-Depends? if no, please write them from scratch,
> > > making sure t
On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 04:45:56PM -0300, Roberto Oliveira wrote:
> > I still see a lot of old junk in debian/control:
> > - did you write that Build-Depends? if no, please write them from scratch,
> > making sure they are complete and necessary.
> I Checked all the dependencies and now just the
Hi Andrey,
I think I did all the changes you suggested, can you take a look on it
again, please?
> Control: tags -1 + moreinfo
>
> I still see a lot of old junk in debian/control:
> - did you write that Build-Depends? if no, please write them from scratch,
> making sure they are complete and n
Control: tags -1 + moreinfo
I still see a lot of old junk in debian/control:
- did you write that Build-Depends? if no, please write them from scratch,
making sure they are complete and necessary.
- why Conflicts: oprofile-modules*? There are no such packages in last
releases.
- Replaces: opro
Thanks for reviewing it Andrey!
I tried to apply your suggestions in the package and also made some other
improvements. Hope it looks better now.
Why is this not using dh(1)?
It's also hardcoding /usr/lib and not the multiarch path in d/rules.
Why is changelog-move-to-git-log.patch needed?
There are a lot of strange and ancient things kept from the previous
Debian package, yet d/changelog doesn't have the old entries. OTOH
d/copyright doesn
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: wishlist
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "oprofile"
Package name: oprofile
Version : 1.2.0-1
URL : http://oprofile.sourceforge.net/
License : GPL2
Section : devel
It builds those binary packa
18 matches
Mail list logo