One source, two binary packages
Thanks for all the input. Manoj, I have been relying upon your
posted rules files from the start. Without them, I wouldn't have
gotten this far.
I have found my problem. I believed that changelog.Debian
applied to the binary package, rather than to the source package, and
had created one for each binary package. As soon as I put the same
changelog in each directory tree the rules file ran without errors.
To avoid puzzling users, should the changelog mention that two binary
packages were made from the source?
If I had looked more closely at the rest of Manoj's debian
directories instead of just the rules I might not have made this error
in the first place.
I have corrected a couple of typos in one of the manpages.
The policy manual says, "the copyright file must . . . explain
briefly what modifications were made in the Debian version of the
package compared to the upstream one." Should these minor corrections
be mentioned in the copyright file? Should they be mentioned in the
I expect to make some minor modifications in the upstream
Makefile.in. Should these be mentioned in the copyright file or the
After I complete some more cleaning up and checking, I will
upload this package to my home directory on master, and ask that
someone review and comment on it.
|_) _ |_ Robert D. Hilliard <email@example.com>
|_) (_) |_) Palm City, FL USA PGP Key ID: A8E40EB9
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to firstname.lastname@example.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com