Re: 3 new packages
Hi Andreas
Andreas Tille wrote:
On Fri, 25 Mar 2005, Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote:
gff2aplot: Pair-wise alignment-plots for genomic sequences in PostScript.
Just uploaded.
Thanks! :-)
gff2ps: Produces PostScript graphical output from GFF-files.
> It depends from bash 3.0. Is this dependency really necessary.
I'm just asking because I guess it will keep the package outside
Sarge (if it should have any chance which is quite low anyway.
Actually, it needs bash >= 2
I have only put bash on build-depends, but lintian said that essential
package must be versioned. I thought that we need to use the last
version available on SID, because this I have put >= 3
Upstream author just said that awk >= 3 and bash >= 2.
I can change the version to 2.
raster3d: set of tools for generating high quality raster images of
I just did an 'fmt -s' on the debian/copyright file to adjust
line lengthes for easiere reading.
OK. Thank you for that.
The big problem here is Raster3D. I have put it on non-free section.
Could someone take a look at him ans say if it can go on Debian? Info
is available at debian/copyright file.
IMHO it can go into non-free.
Right.
Also, could someone verify the quality of the packages, if they are OK?
I think gff2aplot is fine, thus it is uploaded. I personally have
no bash 3.0 installed thus I was not yet able to verify gff2ps. I have
to admit that I never have seen a shell script program with 3602 lines
of code in one file. Normally this kind of complex programming should
be done more modular and probably not really in in bash code which
depends from a certain bash version. This sounds a little bit suspicious
to me. But if it would work and people regard it as nice tool then
this is no argument to keep it outside.
Sure. Anyway, I have made some more tests with gff2ps. It's looking like
that some PS that it generates cannot be correctly interpreted by
ghostview. I will have to test it more. Sorry for creating the package
and not tested it so much.
Regarding to raster3d I would suggest to split up the package into
an architecture dependant package and a common package bacause the
size of the architecture independant part is about ten times of the
architecture dependant binaries.
No problem. I will work on that. When I finish it I will contact you.
Cheers
Nelson
Reply to: