Hi, The following lintian warnings are left: W: cipux-cibot: zero-byte-file-in-doc-directory usr/share/doc/cipux-cibot/html/cipux_setup_ldap_objects.html I fail to see where this file comes from (and therefore, why it's empty. Christan, any pointers? W: cipux-cibot: script-not-executable ./etc/cipux/refine.d/disabled/kde3.sh W: cipux-cibot: script-not-executable ./etc/cipux/refine.d/disabled/mozilla.sh W: cipux-cibot: script-not-executable ./etc/cipux/refine.d/disabled/xchat.sh W: cipux-cibot: script-not-executable ./etc/cipux/refine.d/disabled/oo11.sh W: cipux-cibot: script-not-executable ./etc/cipux/refine.d/disabled/soffice7.sh W: cipux-cibot: script-not-executable ./etc/cipux/refine.d/enabled/void.sh Mentioned in another mail already... The following linda warnings are left: Check DocumentationCheck failed. Exception KeyError thrown ('/usr/share/man/man3/CipUX::CAT::Web.3pm.gz'). Check FilesCheck failed. Exception KeyError thrown ('/usr/share/man/man3/CipUX'). Check DocumentationCheck failed. Exception KeyError thrown ('/usr/share/man/man3/CipUX::Conversion.3pm.gz'). Check FilesCheck failed. Exception KeyError thrown ('/usr/share/man/man3/CipUX'). I have not yet checked those, but these are no linda warnings, but linda chokes over the files! Any clues anyone? W: cipux-cibot; File /usr/lib/cipux/sbin/cipux_setup contained in /usr/lib of Architecture: all package. W: cipux-profile; File /usr/lib/cipux/sbin/cipux_profile_fr contained in /usr/lib of Architecture: all package. W: cipux-rpc; File /usr/lib/cipux/bin/cipux_rpc contained in /usr/lib of Architecture: all package. W: cipux-samba; File /usr/lib/cipux/bot/cipux_bot_logon_ldap contained in /usr/lib of Architecture: all package. These files _are_ placed in the wrong directory. According to FHS, /usr/lib is for architecture dependent files, but those shell scripts are architecture independent. /usr/share/cipux/(s)bin is the proper place for them. Christian, I hope it's enough to move them there and to change the PATH/some pathes? Right? Can you please do this? (This change is also needed for any other distribution, which follows FHS) http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#USRSHAREARCHITECTUREINDEPENDENTDATA Christian, I have not read debian/changelog real carefully, but from glimpsing over it, I have the impression you either repeat the upstream changelog there or use it as upstream changelog. Neither is good. Please use an own changelog, debian/changelog is intented for debian packaging changes mostly. It's ok to mention big changes, but normally you just say "new upstream version $version". regards, Holger -- quoting http://www.debian.org/MailingLists/index.de.html#codeofconduct "When using the Debian mailing lists, please follow these rules:... When replying to messages on the mailing list, do not send a carbon copy (CC) to the original poster unless they explicitly request to be copied." We live in the year 2006, a few bytes wasted in the footer of a mail don't hurt anymore, but everybody is flooded with information and attention is a spare ressource. If you send a mail cc: to a list and to me, it will catch my attention even if I have none. Please don't. Unless you specifically want to catch my attention of course :) But If I don't say otherwise, I'm subscribed to the mailinglist (and this is true for non-Debian lists as well) and you don't need to cc: me. Thanks.
Description: PGP signature