Bug#687620: RFS: udpxy/1.0.23-1 [ITP]
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 10:50:49PM +1100, Alex Z wrote:
> Almost all notices you mentioned below are fixed. At least, now we
> have manpages. :-)
Ok. Let me have a look below.
> for linking. But lintian says, that "udpxy:
> hardening-no-fortify-functions usr/bin/udpxrec".
> Can it be false-positive?
This check has had false positives in the past. As you checked the
compilation and linking steps, you can likely ignore it.
> Helmut Grohne wrote 2012-10-26 02:57:
> >The long description of your package looks suspiciously short.
> >This is
> >not a problem, if it says all that needs to be said. However some
> >bits
> >are missing. Please try to answer the following questions inside the
> >long description:
> >1) What are example use cases?
At least half-way answered. Just when do I need multicast?
> >2) Does a client to this proxy need special capabilities?
?
> >3) Do multicast streams have to be configured with the daemon or can
> > they be configured from the client?
?
In addition your long description contains grammar errors. Please ask
debian-l10n-english@lists.debian.org for help with your description.
> >Your destdir patch solves the issue for Debian, but it would be
> >nicer,
> >if it would add $PREFIX as well. Then you can prod upstream to
> >include
> >the patch and drop it yourself.
Where did the patch go?
> >A watch file seems missing. Since the project is hosted at
> >sourceforge
> >adding one should be easy.
Now you do have a watch file, but it does not work:
| uscan warning: In debian/watch,
| no matching hrefs for watch line
| http://sf.net/udpxy/udpxy-(.+)\.(?:zip|tgz|tbz2|txz|tar\.gz|tar\.bz2|tar\.xz)
> >The documentation shipped with the package seems to be lacking as
> >well.
> >A manual page seems completely absent. Could you write one?
So you have a manpage now? I just cannot find it. The tarball does not
contain a doc dir as mentioned in debian/udpxy.manpages. Maybe you
messed up the tarballs?
Arguably you didn't solve "almost all" points from the last review. This
is just re-examining the old list. No build attempted or deeper digging.
Helmut
Reply to: