Re: RFS: proda
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Charles Plessy ha scritto:
> Dear David,
> it seems that you have adressed most of Nico's points in a revised
> version uploaded to mentors. It is very clean, I just have a few
> About debian/rules:
> - The configure rule is mandatory, but in this case, we do not need it to
> contain anything.
Fixed (completely removed it).
> - I would tend to remove the template's comments, but this is up to
> your taste.
I removed most of the comments.
> - Similarly, you can safely remove lines such as # dh_installmenu, as
> we can be 99.9 % sure that they will not be useful in the future.
> - You can give arguments to dh_clean and dh_install, then you do not
> need the rm -f and the install commands. (This is again up to your
> - Giving an argument to dh_installdirs, you would not need debian/dirs
Done as well
> About proda.1:
> - As you built it from an xml source, I think that it is important to
> provide its sourcce in the package.
> - You can rebuild it at each package building, it does not take so much
> CPU. Here is an example of debian/rules file which does this:
> - You would then need to build-depend on xsltproc, docbook-xsl,
I had some problems because I had deleted my .xml, so I had something with
`doclifter`, and I wrote the markup again.
It seems like the new manpage is better than the previous :-)
> - The manpage says that proda is documented by an info file, but it is
> not true.
Sorry, just a stupid dh_make template left there.
> - I think that it is not necessary to say in the Description section
> that the man page was written for Debian.
> - As proda is in the public domain, I think that the GPL is a bit too
> much for the manpage. I tend to like to give a permission to use,
> modify, copy and redistribute as the program itself for my manpages.
> But it is a matter of taste.
It would be nice, in fact, to release it in public domain too, thus contributing
to "proda" itself.
I'll contact the author as well for that.
> Lastly, proda is related to the probcons and amap programs, which failed
> to build with gcc-4.3. It means that it is likely that you would have a
> FTBFS bug filed by Martin Michlmayr soon after getting proda in the main
> archive. Depending on how playful and busy you are, you may be
> interested to check by yourself before getting sponsored.
But I've read that gcc-snapshot (which should provide -4.3), is not yet
available for i386s. My gcc-snapshot (well, the one in my repositories) has
version 20061022-1, is ti the -4.3? I don't know. I'll give it a try on my
machine. I'll see if I can find another machine to work on (maybe sf.net
> Have a nice day,
Thanks, you too.
The package has been uploaded again to mentors. See previous mails for the link.
Linux Registered User #334216
Get FireFox! >> http://snipurl.com/gofoxygo/ <<
Blog >> http://www.hanskalabs.net/ <<
Staff >> http://www.debianizzati.org/ <<
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----