[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#657428: RFS: surf -- simple web browser (QA upload)



On 16:46 Fri 27 Jan     , Jakub Wilk wrote:
> > * QA upload.
> 
> Here, for completeness, I would mention that you changed the
> Maintainer field to Debian QA Group.

I'll add this
> 
> > * debian/control:
> >   + Bumped Standards-Version to 3.9.2
> 
> Did this require any changes to the packaging?

It didn't require any changes to packaging I'll mention it in the
changelog

> 
> > * debian/surf.postinst:
> >   + Reduced the update-alternative priority to 30 as per request from user
> >     to the previous maintainer
> 
> Hmm. Was there a bug report about that?

No previous maintainer Kai forwarded mail to me as I had adopted his
dwm package. I asked the reporter to raise a bug but he didn't do
that. So what do you suggest me to do for this? Shall I raise a bug or
its not required?.


> 
> > * debian/rules:
> >   + Introduced dpkg-buildflags by patching config.mk with
> >dpkg-buildflags.patch
> 
> This is formulated in a confusing way. I had to look at sources to
> understand what happened.
> 
> Okay, so there are two changes:
> 1) You added a patch for config.mk that makes it honour
> {C,CPP,LD}FLAGS from environment.
> 2) You added a hunk to debian/rules that exports these variables.
> 
> The hunk looks like this:
> 
> +#export DH_VERBOSE=1
> +
> +-include /usr/share/dpkg/buildflags.mk
> +export CPPFLAGS CFLAGS LDFLAGS
> 
> Unfortunately, this _won't_ do the right thing for these dpkg-dev
> versions that didn't provide the /usr/share/dpkg/buildflags.mk file.
> Please see
> <http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2011/10/msg00307.html> to
> understand why.

Ok I went through the conversation so I need to build-depend on
dpkg-dev correct version for this and add conditional check for
buildflags.mk. Please correct me if I'm wrong

> 
> > * debian/source/local-options:
> >   + Introduced local-options to undo the patches
> 
> No, no, no. debian/source/local-options doesn't belong in the source
> package. And if you look carefully, dpkg-source in fact didn't
> include it in .debian.tar.gz.

Okay I read maint-guide section 5.22 again and now I'm clear this is
only for changing the behaviour dpkg-source locally. I'll remove this
section from changelog.

I'll upload finished package ASAP. Thanks for the review :)

Best Regards
-- 
Vasudev Kamath

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: