Ok, performed a NEW review. There's only one thing I asked Dave to
address before accepting:

 * I was discussing this with Dave already, but since there's a new user
added during rgpiod installation, I feel that it might be good to remove
it during package purge as well (as Dave mentioned, this is the case for
packages like sssd). Dave had valid doubts if leaving files (that might
be created by rgpiod) with non-existent ownership is nice, but I think
the other choice is better. Since yeah, we can't really guarantee we'll
handle all the weird stuff the package does during runtime, but maybe we
should make sure that at least everything the package system installs is
also removed - even if there would be leftover files with a non-existing
ownership.

Some other stuff, even more minor, to be considered for some future
version of the package (non-blocking):

 * Adding the legacy get-orig-tarball target to debian/rules. It has been 
obsoleted by debian/watch, but here, since the upstream prepares releases in a 
very specific way, we can't really use that. Dave prepared a get-orig-tarball 
script for that, which is good, but I think it would be nice to at least add 
this legacy target as a fallback for people unable to use uscan.
 * Some of the /etc/ content removal in the .postrm script seems redundant, 
since dpkg should handle proper conffile removal by itself on purge. Might be 
good to take a look and see if maybe adding /etc/rgpiod/ to .dirs will help by 
dpkg handling the removals on its own? Something to look into!

Otherwise I think this is good to go. I can pull the updated package
from the PPA directly.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1916901

Title:
  [needs-packaging] lg (lgpio, rgpio, rgpiod, rgs)

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/1916901/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

Reply via email to