Re: RFS: roxterm (now 1.15.2-1)
On Sat, 4 Jul 2009 23:05:14 +0100
Jonathan Wiltshire <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> (IANADD, so no upload from me - sorry)
But thanks for your advice.
> On Sat, Jul 04, 2009 at 10:43:04PM +0100, Tony Houghton wrote:
> > Lintian gave a couple of warnings because it thought I was trying to
> > perform a NMU. Presumably a sponsor will update the system to list
> > me as maintainer and that will be resolved?
> At the moment you are NMUing because your changelog tail doesn't match
> the Maintainer field in debian/control. Set the Maintainer to you to
> indicate that you're adopting this package.
Doh, I missed the obvious again :-/.
> Lintian also complains that:
> P: roxterm source: direct-changes-in-diff-but-no-patch-system
> roxterm-config.1 and 1 more
> P: roxterm: copyright-refers-to-symlink-license
> I: roxterm: desktop-entry-contains-encoding-key
> /usr/share/applications/roxterm.desktop:2 Encoding
> (to see this output, run lintian with -IE --pedantic)
> They're not the end of the world, but you should take care of them if
> you can.
Thanks, I've fixed those.
> I may be wrong, but you should probably test in your postinst what apt
> wants you to do (install, upgrade, abort etc). See
> /usr/share/debhelper/dh_make/debian/postinst.ex for an example. The
> summary at the top is useful. Blindly using 'update-alternatives
> --install' isn't very helpful in some circumstances. Your prerm script
> does do this check.
After reading the follow-ups I left this as it is.
I've uploaded 1.15.2-1 (I made a couple of the fixes upstream). The
upload appeared to go OK but it isn't showing up in the pool etc yet. Is