Re: Mpich 1/2/3
Hi Torquil,
mpich is almost ready to be "multiarched". Please, fix some
lintian warnings and errors. Some of them I have fixed already.
Also we will need to build all build-rdeps to check, whether
they are happy with updated package.
Thanks,
Anotn
2013/6/18 Torquil Macdonald Sørensen <torquil@gmail.com>:
> That sounds great! I'm going camping for a few days, but I'll be able to
> test it this weekend.
>
> Torquil
>
>
> On 18/06/13 22:15, Anton Gladky wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have done some commits into mpich2-directory. Please, check
>> it out and test. I am planning to make a couple of more within the next
>> few days. We should prepare for the renaming.
>>
>> Anton
>>
>> 2013/5/28 Torquil Macdonald Sørensen <torquil@gmail.com>:
>>>
>>> Hi Anton!
>>>
>>> Yes, I would appreciate the help, so that is very kind of you.
>>>
>>> Btw, your second point (regarding dh) is something we had planned. But
>>> even
>>> though the package has potential for improvement in several places, my
>>> personal plan was to not do everything at once, in order to prevent
>>> several
>>> problems appearing simulaneously. The name change in addition to
>>> inclusion
>>> of the NMU in the changelog was enough of a worry for me at the moment
>>> :-)
>>>
>>> But if someone more experienced could help I would be glad to work on
>>> more
>>> improvements simultaneously. Actually, I have been doing some work on
>>> moving
>>> it to dh locally, but thought I would delay it until after the change of
>>> name has gone through without too many problems.
>>>
>>> Regarding the change of name, I don't really have a strong opinion on the
>>> matter. Replacing mpich2 with a good mpich3 package in Debian is my main
>>> goal right now.
>>>
>>> Best regards
>>> Torquil Sørensen
>>>
>>>
>>> On 26/05/13 23:31, Anton Gladky wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Torquil, some suggestions on packaging:
>>>> I think it is better:
>>>>
>>>> 1) to use compat-level 9
>>>> 2) dh instead of cdbs, debian/rules will be shorter and more clear in
>>>> this
>>>> case;
>>>> 3) copyright-file in DEP-5 format;
>>>> 4) DEP-3 for patches
>>>> 5) postinst and prerm scripts should be inspected.
>>>>
>>>> If you want, I can try to help with some of points.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Anton
>>>>
>>>> 2013/5/26 Torquil Macdonald Sørensen <torquil@gmail.com>:
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, I have uploaded the mpich 3.0.3 sources to the upstream branch in
>>>>> the
>>>>> git repository, as well as made some changes in debian/ to make it
>>>>> work.
>>>>> I
>>>>> might have a few more small changes, though, in addition to uploading
>>>>> the
>>>>> 3.0.4 upstream sources which are now available. E.g. perhaps upping the
>>>>> Debian standards version and including an earlier NMU upload in the
>>>>> changelog.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have changed the source name to mpich in the git repository, and have
>>>>> also
>>>>> added a few dummy transitional packages since the binary packages will
>>>>> also
>>>>> change names a bit due to the name change and due to an increase in the
>>>>> library soname.
>>>>>
>>>>> Despite the fact that the existence of the transitional packages seems
>>>>> to
>>>>> give a smooth upgrade on my system, I am of course not 100% sure that
>>>>> the
>>>>> scheme I have deviced is optimal, since this is a bit new to me.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards
>>>>> Torquil Sørensen
>>>>>
>
Reply to: