Re: dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: dependency on.... (they use none of its symbols)
В Tue, 24 Mar 2009 14:36:51 +0100, Bernhard R. Link написа: http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2009-01/msg00413.html |(elf_link_add_object_symbols): Link in --as-needed libs if they | satisfy undefined symbols in other libs. I'm not into bfd enough to understand what it actually does, but both things I can imagine would be another argument against using it: Provided that I understood your example well, it was describing a scenario like this: program |\ | \ libB\ | (explicit link while not actually using libA) | / libA/ With the old behavior of --as-needed the dependency on libA would indeed be dropped, which is a problem. Now it will be retained, assuming that libB uses symbols from libA (which is my understanding of the biggining of your example -- Assume a program uses libB, which uses libA...). There will be dpkg-shlibdeps warning (dependency on libA could be avoided as usr/bin/program does not use any of its symbols...) but that's just a warning. 2) if it means to not remove a library that is already needed by a library needed Yes. while it would silence warnings for the cases you would want to know about: linking against libraries not used at all. Why? It would warn you that depending on libA is useless, but as the maintainer of the program package you already know that's not true. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: dependency on.... (they use none of its symbols)
В Wed, 25 Mar 2009 11:09:39 +, Yavor Doganov написа: (which is my understanding of the biggining of your example ^ Ugh. I certainly meant beginning; sorry. One more thing. IMHO --as-needed is potentially dangerous when it's not used together with --no-undefined. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
file not instaled by makefile
Hello mentors, I can't get over with installing single file not installed by makefile. name of file is uhjenc.conf and this file is in dir config-files part of my debian/rules:install: install-indep: dh_testdir dh_testroot dh_clean -k -i dh_installdirs -i dh_install -i config-files/uhjenc.conf Quote from man dh_install: If upstream Makefile does not install for you, you can run dh_install on them to move them into place. But there is no example of syntax. My package.install and package.dir files should be fine. Thank you for any advice. regards mira -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
RFS: dante (updated package)
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 1.1.19.dfsg-3 of my package dante. This version does not fix any problems listed in the Debian BTS; what it DOES fix is a serious problem with libsocksd0-dev - it was absolutely and completely uninstallable because I'd mistyped the name of the libsocksd0 dependency :( The 1.1.19.dfsg-3 version also fixes a lot of lintian warnings and updates Standards-Version to 3.8.1 with a minor change to the server startup script. It builds these binary packages: dante-client - SOCKS wrapper for users behind a firewall dante-server - SOCKS (v4 and v5) proxy daemon (danted) libdsocksd0 - SOCKS library for internal use by the dante client libsocksd0 - SOCKS library for packages built using libsocksd-dev libsocksd0-dev - Development files for compiling programs with SOCKS support The package has been tested with lintian and pbuilder. The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/d/dante/dante_1.1.19.dfsg-3.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. G'luck, Peter -- Peter Pentchev r...@ringlet.netr...@space.bgr...@freebsd.org PGP key:http://people.FreeBSD.org/~roam/roam.key.asc Key fingerprint FDBA FD79 C26F 3C51 C95E DF9E ED18 B68D 1619 4553 This sentence would be seven words long if it were six words shorter. pgprmTaD1c1k5.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: file not instaled by makefile
On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 13:53:10 +0100 (CET) Jaromír Mikeš mira.mi...@seznam.cz wrote: Hello mentors, I can't get over with installing single file not installed by makefile. name of file is uhjenc.conf and this file is in dir config-files If you have a debian/install file, you don't need to list the files when calling dh_install; otherwise, you have to also list the target directory, for example: dh_install -i config-files/uhjenc.conf etc/ -- Andrea Bolognani e...@kiyuko.org Resistance is futile, you will be garbage collected. pgpvZuTJXaesx.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: mecab-naist-jdic
On Mon, 23 Mar 2009 22:48:47 +0900 Junichi Uekawa dan...@netfort.gr.jp wrote: It's less easy to maintain patches. How do I patch a file inside that tarball? Okay, it's not easy to maintain patches. Yes. But upstream is quite friendly for us, Debian, and patches will be include at next release time. So we does not maintain so many patches for this package. You're not answering my question properly. But it's easy for clean target. What is the best way to deal with changes autogen.sh or autoreconf -i made? Could you tell me that, please? -- Regards, Hideki Yamane henrich @ debian.or.jp/iijmio-mail.jp http://wiki.debian.org/HidekiYamane -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
RFS: siege (updated package) - after initial mentor comments
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 2.67-1 of my package siege. It builds these binary packages: siege - Http regression testing and benchmarking utility The package appears to be lintian clean. The upload would fix these bugs: 521029, 521034 The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/siege - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/siege/siege_2.67-1.dsc Many thanks for the advice given so far. I have worked through the lintian warnings and sorted those out. I have also taken the time to update the source to be based on the latest available upstream. However, there is a problem, and I seek your advice. I have commented out one quilt patch for now. It was a minor issue, but I would not want this package being uploaded until it is in there, to avoid regression problems. The patch in question modifies Makefile.in. This in turn forces the usual auto* stuff to happen. The problems are: 1. For some reason, the latest upstream version of this package is using automake-1.6 (as opposed to 1.9 as it did previously). Is this version still available as it didn't come up when I did a quick search... 2. When the autobuild stuff happens, naturally all the related files are now considered modified. Therefore lintian complains before it isn't done directly by one of the quilt patches. Any suggestions most welcome. Kind regards, Tris. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: RFS: siege (updated package) - after initial mentor comments
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 03:32:01PM +, Tristan Greaves wrote: 1.For some reason, the latest upstream version of this package is using automake-1.6 (as opposed to 1.9 as it did previously). Is this version still available as it didn't come up when I did a quick search... Looks like you can choose from 1.4, 1.7, 1.8 or 1.9. I don't understand why a newer upstream is using an older automake though? 2.When the autobuild stuff happens, naturally all the related files are now considered modified. Therefore lintian complains before it isn't done directly by one of the quilt patches. Files that were deleted during build don't show up in the diff.gz, so: rm the modified files in your clean target, and lintian won't complain (to make sure double builds work, you might have to copy things back from auto* in your configure target). -- Jonathan Wiltshire PGP/GPG: 0xDB800B52 / 4216 F01F DCA9 21AC F3D3 A903 CA6B EA3E DB80 0B52 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: RFS: siege (updated package) - after initial mentor comments
Jonathan Wiltshire wrote: On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 03:32:01PM +, Tristan Greaves wrote: 1. For some reason, the latest upstream version of this package is using automake-1.6 (as opposed to 1.9 as it did previously). Is this version still available as it didn't come up when I did a quick search... Looks like you can choose from 1.4, 1.7, 1.8 or 1.9. I don't understand why a newer upstream is using an older automake though? I double-checked just to be sure, but the original source is definitely that way. 2. When the autobuild stuff happens, naturally all the related files are now considered modified. Therefore lintian complains before it isn't done directly by one of the quilt patches. Files that were deleted during build don't show up in the diff.gz, so: rm the modified files in your clean target, and lintian won't complain (to make sure double builds work, you might have to copy things back from auto* in your configure target). Okay. For now, I've worked around this issue as the patch in question does not really apply now that I've adjusted the rules anyway. I've uploaded a fresh copy. Is this all set to be uploaded now? If so, what happens next? Many thanks, Tris. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: file not instaled by makefile
Od: Andrea Bolognani e...@kiyuko.org JM I can't get over with installing single file not installed by makefile. JM name of file is uhjenc.conf and this file is in dir config-files AB If you have a debian/install file, you don't need to list the files when AB calling dh_install; otherwise, you have to also list the target directory, AB for example: AB dh_install -i config-files/uhjenc.conf etc/ That's work perfectly thanks a lot. Actually there are more items (40) in my config-files dir and some of them even in subdirs. I've tried install them by this way: dh_install -i config-files/ and thisway: dh_install -i --sourcedir=config-files/ In conjunction with my debian/package.install file. But without success. Can you please check syntax of these lines? regards mira -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: file not instaled by makefile
On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 18:25:32 +0100 (CET) Jaromír Mikeš mira.mi...@seznam.cz wrote: Actually there are more items (40) in my config-files dir and some of them even in subdirs. I've tried install them by this way: dh_install -i config-files/ and thisway: dh_install -i --sourcedir=config-files/ In conjunction with my debian/package.install file. But without success. Can you please check syntax of these lines? You're forgetting the destination dir in the first call. I think dh_install -i config-files/* etc/ should do the trick; if you already have a debian/install file, however, you could just drop config-files/* etc/ into it to achieve the same result. -- Andrea Bolognani e...@kiyuko.org Resistance is futile, you will be garbage collected. pgpc3wWDSxKnm.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: file not instaled by makefile
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 06:25:32PM +0100, Jaromír Mikeš wrote: In conjunction with my debian/package.install file. But without success. Can you please check syntax of these lines? You have substituted the name of your package here, haven't you? (e.g. debian/jconv-reverb.install) -- Jonathan Wiltshire PGP/GPG: 0xDB800B52 / 4216 F01F DCA9 21AC F3D3 A903 CA6B EA3E DB80 0B52 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
more ideas for (semi-)automatable package metrics?
Hi all, At [1] we have a fairly comprehensive list of possible metrics (quality and otherwise) sponsors may want to prioritise packages to be reviewed/uploaded on. I'm wondering if there is anything obvious missing from the list. Also, if you have documented your criteria for sponsorship, please add a link to it from [2]. 1. http://wiki.debian.org/DebianMentorsNet#Metrics 2. http://wiki.debian.org/SponsorChecklist -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: file not instaled by makefile
Od: Andrea Bolognani e...@kiyuko.org Actually there are more items (40) in my config-files dir and some of them even in subdirs. I've tried install them by this way: dh_install -i config-files/ and thisway: dh_install -i --sourcedir=config-files/ In conjunction with my debian/package.install file. But without success. Can you please check syntax of these lines? You're forgetting the destination dir in the first call. I think dh_install -i config-files/* etc/ should do the trick; if you already have a debian/install file, however, you could just drop config-files/* etc/ into it to achieve the same result. That work like a charm ... thank you :) best regards mira -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: file not instaled by makefile
Od: Jonathan Wiltshire deb...@jwiltshire.org.uk In conjunction with my debian/package.install file. But without success. Can you please check syntax of these lines? You have substituted the name of your package here, haven't you? (e.g. debian/jconv-reverb.install) Thank you Jonathan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: RFS: CLAM, C++ library for audio and music
A Dimecres 25 Març 2009 06:09:25, Paul Wise va escriure: On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 12:25 AM, David García Garzón dgar...@iua.upf.edu wrote: * The only lintian warning i get is: W: libclam13: package-name-doesnt-match-sonames libclam-audioio13 libclam- core13 libclam-processing13 As suggested by a debian developer and according to libpkg-guide we joined the library as the three libraries are going to change the soname at once on every release (i am also upstream release manager), but in some sponsoring guidelines i read that sponsored packages should be lintian clean including warnings. Should i ignore the warning or should i split the binary packages? It seems silly to have libclam-audioio, libclam-core and libclam-processing when you change the SONAME on all three at the same time. Why not just have libclam? That's a good point. That will silent lintian but we should change all the build system which now is splitted in three. If i can't ignore that warning i would prefer splitting the packages. Splitting the package will be a matter of reverting some changes we did. We splitted the library to provide modurarity and handling the build in three parts to speed up dependency checking and link time. Indeed libclam-processing is still too big for my taste. Another of the goals of the lib split was reducing programs third party dependencies by selecting modules, which would be ideal from a debian point of view if we separate packages, but the reorganization went half the way and current partition still doesn't make that feasible. Most applications will need an 'audioio' method (ladspa, jack, portaudio, portmidi, libsndfile, libmad...) and some 'processing' module and both depend on 'core'. We (upstream hat) plan to do a split them for a next release so that audioio factorizes out dependencies and processing gets into smaller components. Until then it is just a monolithic lib split in three parts. :-( So, by discarding joining the libs, what are remaining the options? splitting packages? ignoring warnings? Changing the SONAME at every release isn't the right thing to do either, it should only be changed when you break the ABI. CLAM has X.Y.Z version schema, and 'guarantees' no ABI change for X.Y. which is coupled to the soname. That said, i have to recognize that last releases have been X.Y.0 so ABI broke. Until now, such changes have not been a big issue since most of the users build their applications from sources and a nice porting guide and scripts were provided for each X.Y release. Your notice of warning at the IRC made me aware that as soon as we get packages depending on clam in debian we should avoid or retain ABI incompatible changes and make more X.Y.Z releases. Thanks, again, for the feedback. David. http://clam-project.org/wiki/Version_Migration_Guide -- David García Garzón (Work) dgarcia at iua dot upf anotherdot es http://www.iua.upf.edu/~dgarcia -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
RFS: fsprotect
Dear mentors, I am looking for guidance and a sponsor for my package fsprotect. * Package name: fsprotect Version : 1.0.1 Upstream Author : Stefanos Harhalakis v...@v13.gr (me) * URL : not available yet * License : GPL Section : admin It builds these binary packages: fsprotect - Helper scripts to make filesystems immutable The package appears to be lintian clean. The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/f/fsprotect - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/f/fsprotect/fsprotect_1.0.1.dsc For convenience I summarize that: This is a package that protects existing filesystems (even /) using aufs with very little configuration. I've made all changes that were requested except from one: The package still creates a directory named /fsprotect: * You suggested to create this directory somewhere under /lib instead of /: * I believe that perhaps having a directory under / may be justified since there will be some (more than two) filesystems mounted under it (two for each protected partition) and it must pre-exist in the root partition. * I'm not sure if /lib is the right place for this * According to FHS 2.3, /lib is used for Essential shared libraries and kernel modules, which doesn't fit the requirements of fsprotect. So I ask for further guidance on this. Should I a) Use /fsprotect b) Use /lib/fsprotect c) Use another directory (which?) ? Also, I'm still looking for a sponsor. Kind regards Stefanos Harhalakis p.s. Please CC me in your replies. I'm not subscribed to the list. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
man pages question
Dear mentors, I got these warnings in lintian for my package, having no idea how to solve this issue. I probably have to manage to same man pages opening like this: man jack-jconv will be opened on these too: man jconv man fconv man mkwavex Am I right? please can somebody advise me? regards mira W: jack-jconv: binary-without-manpage usr/bin/fconv N: N: Each binary in /usr/bin, /usr/sbin, /bin, /sbin or /usr/games should N: have a manual page N: N: Note that though the man program has the capability to check for N: several program names in the NAMES section, each of these programs N: should have its own manual page (a symbolic link to the appropriate N: manual page is sufficient) because other manual page viewers such as N: xman or tkman don't support this. N: N: If the man pages are provided by another package on which this package N: depends, lintian may not be able to determine that man pages are N: available. In this case, after confirming that all binaries do have N: man pages after this package and its dependencies are installed, N: please add a lintian override. N: N: Refer to Policy Manual, section 12.1 for details. N: W: jack-jconv: binary-without-manpage usr/bin/jconv W: jack-jconv: binary-without-manpage usr/bin/mkwavex -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: RFS: dante (updated package)
On Wednesday 25 March 2009 14:54:41 Peter Pentchev wrote: Dear mentors, Hello Peter, I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 1.1.19.dfsg-3 of my package dante. This version does not fix any problems listed in the Debian BTS; what it DOES fix is a serious problem with libsocksd0-dev - it was absolutely and completely uninstallable because I'd mistyped the name of the libsocksd0 dependency :( The 1.1.19.dfsg-3 version also fixes a lot of lintian warnings and updates Standards-Version to 3.8.1 with a minor change to the server startup script. I looked at 1.1.19.dfsg-3 and uploaded it. Thanks for taking care of these! -- pub 4096R/0E4BD0AB 2003-03-18 people.fccf.net/danchev/key pgp.mit.edu signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Test-Buildd or Debian Machine?
Hi, I'd like to sponsor a package that have problems in building on some architectures. After fixing I need to build this package (at least) on problematic architectures. Is there any buildd network for test builds available? If not, I think I have to use some Debian Machines. Is there any documentation about using this machines apart from http://www.debian.org/devel/dmup? How can I get an account on some of the machines (e. g. paer.debian.org)? (I'm a DD.) Kindl regards, Erik -- www.ErikSchanze.de * Bitte keine HTML-E-Mails! No HTML mails, please! Limit: 100 kB * - Linux-Info-Tag in Dresden auch 2009 wieder * Info: http://www.linux-info-tag.de/* -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Test-Buildd or Debian Machine?
On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 22:20:31 +0100 Erik Schanze schan...@gmx.de wrote: Hi, I'd like to sponsor a package that have problems in building on some architectures. After fixing I need to build this package (at least) on problematic architectures. Is there any buildd network for test builds available? If not, I think I have to use some Debian Machines. Is there any documentation about using this machines apart from http://www.debian.org/devel/dmup? How can I get an account on some of the machines (e. g. paer.debian.org)? (I'm a DD.) DD's already have access to such chroots on those machines - replied off-list. -- Neil Williams = http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/ pgprDcoioCc6T.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Build reproducibility
2009/3/25 Paul Wise p...@debian.org: Ahhh, upstream should not be using this variable, please get them to switch to the po/LINGUAS file instead. This way it should not be nessecary to rebuild the configure Makefiles in order to support and install a new language. After I'm done with packaging this version I'll take some time to understand well how the whole localization stuff is dealt with in the build infrastructure and I'll write upstream. Do you have pointers? Thanks, Luca -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: translation support (was: Build reproducibility)
On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 00:31:41 +0100 Luca Niccoli lultimou...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/3/25 Paul Wise p...@debian.org: Ahhh, upstream should not be using this variable, please get them to switch to the po/LINGUAS file instead. This way it should not be nessecary to rebuild the configure Makefiles in order to support and install a new language. After I'm done with packaging this version I'll take some time to understand well how the whole localization stuff is dealt with in the build infrastructure and I'll write upstream. Do you have pointers? $ cd $src/po/ $ intltool-update -r $ man po-debconf-report-po (Debian has translators who are happy to do some program translations as well as the debconf templates - indeed many upstreams translators are also Debian translators.) Depends what you mean by pointers. http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep4/ http://www.uk.debian.org/international/l10n/ http://www.uk.debian.org/international/l10n/po/ http://www.uk.debian.org/international/l10n/po/it http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/serendipity/index.php?/categories/3-i18n -- Neil Williams = http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/ pgp0Il5Zn3Jgb.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: dante (updated package)
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 10:58:47PM +0200, George Danchev wrote: On Wednesday 25 March 2009 14:54:41 Peter Pentchev wrote: Dear mentors, Hello Peter, I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 1.1.19.dfsg-3 of my package dante. This version does not fix any problems listed in the Debian BTS; what it DOES fix is a serious problem with libsocksd0-dev - it was absolutely and completely uninstallable because I'd mistyped the name of the libsocksd0 dependency :( The 1.1.19.dfsg-3 version also fixes a lot of lintian warnings and updates Standards-Version to 3.8.1 with a minor change to the server startup script. I looked at 1.1.19.dfsg-3 and uploaded it. Thanks for taking care of these! Thanks! :) G'luck, Peter -- Peter Pentchev r...@ringlet.netr...@space.bgr...@freebsd.org PGP key:http://people.FreeBSD.org/~roam/roam.key.asc Key fingerprint FDBA FD79 C26F 3C51 C95E DF9E ED18 B68D 1619 4553 .siht ekil ti gnidaer eb d'uoy ,werbeH ni erew ecnetnes siht fI pgpoEjRWgXpMl.pgp Description: PGP signature
[Fwd: RFS: siege (updated package)]
Hi, Anyone willing to sponsor this for me? Or point me in the right direction, of course. Thanks, Tris. Original Message Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 2.66-3 of my package siege. It builds these binary packages: siege - Http regression testing and benchmarking utility The upload would fix these bugs: 521029, 521034 The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/siege - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/siege/siege_2.66-3.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. I am taking over maintaining this package. Note that the lintian errors appear to be legacy, as I used quilt for the new patch I introduced. Comments very much welcome. Kind regards Tristan Greaves -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: man pages question
Hellom On Wed, 25 Mar 2009, Jaromír Mikeš wrote: I got these warnings in lintian for my package, having no idea how to solve this issue. I probably have to manage to same man pages opening like this: man jack-jconv will be opened on these too: man jconv man fconv man mkwavex This is done by symbolic links. For example 'man grep' and 'man egrep' are usually the same page. If the links are not created by your upstream package, then you will have to create them with debian/pkgname.links Regards, Kapil. -- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: RFS: siege (updated package)
Charles Plessy wrote: Dear Tristan, lintian is easy to backport. Just debcheckout lintian, git checkout the tag that corresponds to the latest release, and build the package. It is much easier to take the package from sid and install it; it won't make any difference. Have a nice day, Cheers, -- Raphael Geissert - Debian Maintainer www.debian.org - get.debian.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: RFS: siege (updated package)
Tristan Greaves tris...@extricate.org writes: Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 2.66-3 of my package siege. It builds these binary packages: siege - Http regression testing and benchmarking utility It's probably not worth addressing until you make a new release, but the above synopsis (and perhaps the full description, I haven't checked) should spell the initialism “HTTP” with all capitals. -- \ “I doubt, therefore I might be.” —anonymous | `\ | _o__) | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: RFS: CLAM, C++ library for audio and music
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 4:41 AM, David García Garzón dgar...@iua.upf.edu wrote: So, by discarding joining the libs, what are remaining the options? splitting packages? ignoring warnings? Either, I would split them. IIRC the lintian warning may be disabled when the number in the SONAME is the same for all the libraries in the package. Changing the SONAME at every release isn't the right thing to do either, it should only be changed when you break the ABI. CLAM has X.Y.Z version schema, and 'guarantees' no ABI change for X.Y. which is coupled to the soname. Ah, that is quite a good way to do it. PS: you may be interested in joining this team: http://wiki.debian.org/DebianMultimedia -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Build reproducibility
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 8:31 AM, Luca Niccoli lultimou...@gmail.com wrote: After I'm done with packaging this version I'll take some time to understand well how the whole localization stuff is dealt with in the build infrastructure and I'll write upstream. Do you have pointers? Nothing other than the gettext manual: http://www.gnu.org/software/gettext/manual/gettext.html -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
