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

Re: Cloudy package ready for review

Hi Ole,

I've simplified the install files.  As for the package not compiling, I
forgot to mention before that I could not reproduce that. I built the
package successfully on my own machine and on launchpad.  Looking at the
log of the failed build, it seems that pbuilder did not try to resolve
the dependencies and did not install libc etc for the build, which
therefore failed. At the point where my build creates a dependency
package, I see in the log

I: Installing the build-deps
W: no hooks of type D found -- ignoring

But I don't know what one could do to fix that.

Meanwhile, I'm contacting the various data providers to find out under
what terms their data can be distributed and modified.


On 10/06/16 07:48, Ole Streicher wrote:
> Hi Roger,
> Am 09.06.2016 um 14:50 schrieb Roger Wesson:
>> Hi Ole,
>> OK, I've done the following:
>>  - fixed the distribution and date in changelog
>>  - fixed the Zlib license in copyright
>>  - changed the license of my debian files to Zlib
>>  - added -h output to man page
>>  - added a watch file
>>  - split the package as suggested
>>  - also fixed definitions of paths so that the program can find its data
>> after installation
> OK so far. One hint for the debian/cloudy-data.install file (and the
> other as well): You don't need to specify each individual file here, as
> long as it is unique it is enought to use the paths, and you may use "*"
> placeholders. So, a simpler version of debian/cloudy-data.install would
> just be
> usr/share/cloudy/data/
> which is also easier to maintain. If there are individual files that you
> *dont* want to have installed, I would just remove them in
> overwrite_dh_install.
>> I also updated some copyright information for routines in thirdparty.cpp
>> and thirdparty_interpolate.cpp.  A statement on the CHIANTI web page
>> says their data can be used freely so I added that information to the
>> copyright file as well.  I'm working on determining licensing status for
>> the rest of the routines and data files, and will add this information
>> as I get it. 
> For Chiantiy, "Free to use" is not enought. The license should at least
> also cover "Free to modify" and "Free to redistribute" (modified and
> unmodified). See the Debian Free Software Guidelines
> https://www.debian.org/social_contract#guidelines
> You should contact the Chianti people here.
>  I uploaded the latest packaging files, in case it's
>> worthwhile to re-review in the meantime.
> The package still does not compile, I guess you didn't touch that, right?
> Best regards
> Ole

Reply to: