Re: [MoM]: libquazip
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 10:30:24AM +0200, Eric Maeker wrote:
> > The control file contains something but it is commented ... I also do
> > not see any sense in this at all. That's overdesign for a very simple
> > library package and headers belong to the lib*-dev package except there
> > is some very good reason to do it differently.
>
> Oh yes that package was only designed for some of my tests and was not
> designed for package production. I've unabled it but I should have
> forget to remove the dependecy in the -dev package.
Yes. :-)
> > Seems so. Probably the build system might need some tweaking. May be
> > debian-mentors list is your friend in case it is not obvious how to do
> > this.
>
> I'll find the solution, may be for september (not much free time before) :D
> May be using a different --tmpdir for the static lib and a beautifull
> cp in the install override.
No problem.
> > Please reread the second paragraph for what kind of libraries this would
> > be usally done. IMHO it is a total waste of time to do it for leaf
> > packages like this. Libquazip is far from falling under the category
> > where users or maintainers *often* might need the debug feature.
>
> Hum, now that it is done, do we really need to remove it ?
Well, there is some package - but is this package actually working and
do you have some proof that it works correctly. I admit after looking
at its content I do not have the slightest idea what to do with this. I
do not see a point in keeping something just because it is there if it
does not provide any enhancement and could be a potential cause of
problems.
> >> Humm, I add an error with the doc package when using this "global" rule instruction. Didn't you ? Something like duplicate changelog file. That's why I've splitted this into a "per package" instruction.
> >
> > I have not tested the build with my suggestion above but I can not see
> > any reason why this should fail. Perhaps you need to drop NEWS from
> > libquazip-doc.docs ...
>
> Aaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhh... Pffff so many time spent for a so common error...
> I'll check this. Thanks for the correction.
No problem.
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: