Hi, On 6/11/21 7:36 PM, Peymaneh Nejad wrote: > > Hi Nilesh, > > Am 11.06.21 um 14:52 schrieb Nilesh Patra: >>> https://salsa.debian.org/go-team/packages/golang-github-smallstep-truststore >>> >>> Reviews welcome :) >> >> * It looks like this package installs a binary in /usr/bin/truststore >> Are the .go files even needed? >> i.e. is this a application package or an application + library package? >> >> In both the cases, your changes need improvement. >> >> - If it is a program + lib package (on my reading this does not seem to >> be the case though) - just check if the target package depending upon >> it is trying to use the binary or the library too >> >> In such a case, the binary needs to be installed into a separate >> "binary" arch:any package, and the source in a arch:all package, see >> this[3] as an example (inspect the d/control and d/*.install files) >> >> Let me know what exactly is intended to be installed, and in if >> renaming is needed, I'll remove the current repo from salsa and you >> push on a new one. > > Thanks for looking into it. I assumed this would be handled as a prog+lib package (which is what I handed over to dh-make-golang), but it grep'ed through the caddy source code and it seems caddy only imports one of the source files. > > I have excluded the binary with > export DH_GOLANG_EXCLUDES := cmd/truststore > since the sourcecode in cmd/truststore/main.go is not needed either for caddy nor for dh_auto_test. Also deleted the manpage and changed arch to "all". > > I pushed my changes to salsa. I understand that a seperate binary package would then not be needed then? I think it is better if you also vendor the binary with a separate binary package. If say caddy or some other golang package in near future starts using the binary, then we will have to loop through NEW again (un-necessarily) There's just a few changes needed, and maintaining it should be cheap. What say? Nilesh
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature