Building my first package
I'm building my first package and I think I'm generally doing OK.
I do have a few error messages that are mystifying me, and I have
a few packaging questions the documentation doesn't answer.
One question, I can't find any mention in documentation of is the common
practice of providing only one /usr/doc directory and having the other
packages just symlink it. Is this preferable to having separate directories
for related packages? I can certainly see how it would make it easier to find
things.
Also, if I'm releasing a libc6 shared library that never existed as a libc5
library in Debian should I still stick with the g suffix?
Here are the mystifying errors and warnings:
> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: unknown output from ldd on
> `debian/zephyr-server/usr/sbin/zephyrd': ` libzephyr.so.2 => not found'
Of course it's not found, it's provided by one of the packages i'm building.
Surely dpkg-shlibdeps can deal with this? I could set LD_LIBRARY_PATH to
include the build directory that has the shared library, but is that really
necessary to avoid the warning?
> FAKEROOT: after stat, failing?: known=0, stat=d:i=(769:0), mode=0155577,
> nlink=33204, own=(1,2133), size=25510
I get these a lot, should I worry? I still have libc6 2.0.6-2 installed,
maybe this isn't a problem with 2.0.7?
> dpkg-gencontrol: warning: unknown substitution variable ${shlibs:Depends}
The resulting control files seem ok, and that's copied straight out of the
documentation. Am I doing something wrong?
> no utmp entry available and LOGNAME not defined; using uid of process (0) at
> /usr/lib/dpkg/controllib.pl line 29.
I get this all over the place, I don't understand it because I can test perl's
getlogin() as myself and under fakeroot and it always works. I'm pretty sure I
got the utmp transition right when I upgraded to libc6 too.
--
E-mail the word "unsubscribe" to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST. Trouble? E-mail to listmaster@debian.org .
Reply to: