Hello Keith, You didn't explicitly ask anything, but I'm assuming you want an opinion on the packages. :-) also, CC:ing you explicitly as I'm not sure you are subscribed. let me know if that's not necessary On Thu, Nov 01, 2018 at 09:28:21PM -0700, "Keith Packard" wrote: > > With the deprecation of asciidoc, I'm trying to move documentation to > asciidoctor. However, the pdf generation path for that tool, > asciidoctor-pdf, is not packaged for debian. Of course, attempts to > package that end in the usual yak-shaving exercise of packaging all of > the dependencies. These are: > > prawn-icon > prawn-svg > prawn-templates > > The only dependency I was unable to create a debian package for with > gem2deb is prawn-templates which is a little package that contains code > extracted from prawn 0.12 and carried forward to support newer versions > (more or less). It replaces some files from ruby-pdf-core with ones > which seem pretty incompatible. I've worked around that by just not > using this package; it makes asciidoctor-pdf unable to use .pdf files as > images in the resulting output; a restriction I can live with for now. > > I've pushed debian packaging for prawn-icon, prawn-svg and > asciidoctor-pdf to: > > https://salsa.debian.org/keithp/ruby-prawn-icon > https://salsa.debian.org/keithp/ruby-prawn-svg > https://salsa.debian.org/keithp/asciidoctor-pdf > > These have corrected copyright files and have disabled the rake tests as > those didn't work for me, plus the prawn-icon and asciidoctor-pdf > packages install a pile of data files to /usr/lib/ruby/data. Disclaimer: I gave only a quick look at the first package. No packages use /usr/lib/ruby/data so far; we usually use /usr/share/$package for data, but this usually requires some patching. Another alternative that almost always does not require patching since it follow an installation layout that matches what upstream assumes, is to use the "rubygems" installation option¹, in which all Ruby code and associated data is installed under a package-specific directory in /usr/share/rubygems-integration/. ¹ `export DH_RUBY = --gem-install` in debian/rules Also, I noticed that you are using the upstream git repository directly with the Debian packaging in a git branch. I checked debian/control and it has the Ruby team in Maintainer:. I personally find it nice and practical to follow upstream git, but if you want to put these packages for the team, it would be nice to be consistent with the rest of the team packages and use the same structure: git-buildpackage, with upstream source imported from tarballs and pristine-tar (i.e. the standard git-buildpackage workflow)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature