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.
Attachment:
pgpUu5NTmvEMv.pgp
Description: PGP signature