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

Re: Debian 2.6.32 CONFIG_WIRELESS_OLD_REGULATORY, wireless-regdb and crda

On Fri, 2010-02-05 at 15:11 -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:

> And after reviewing this again, I conclude Kel already did all the
> work :) So any mentors / DDs willing to take his package up?
> I think its at:
> dget -ux http://sidux.net/kelmo/sidux/crap/crda/crda_1.1.1-1.dsc

Ok, here are my comments:

I very much like that it is based on the new shiny debhelper 7 stuff and
dpkg-source v3.

I don't really like that it merges the two packages. I don't think that
is appropriate unless upstream is going to do the same.

nl80211.h looks like it comes from Linux, can't you just build-depend on
the linux-libc-dev package and do #include <linux/nl80211.h> ? Comparing
the crda one and the one from Linux 2.6.32 reveals quite a few changes
since you copied nl80211.h into crda.

Even after manually ensuring that sha1sum.txt reflects the sha1sum of
db.txt with "sha1sum db.txt > sha1sum.txt", the wireless-regdb Makefile
still seems to generate a new Debian RSA key pair. If the db.txt hasn't
changed, there is no reason to auto-generate and install a key pair.

The package FTBFS when built twice in a row:

dpkg-source: info: using source format `3.0 (quilt)'
dpkg-source: info: building crda using existing ./crda_1.1.1.orig-wireless-regdb-20091125.tar.bz2 ./crda_1.1.1.orig.tar.bz2
dpkg-source: error: cannot represent change to crda-1.1.1/wireless-regdb-20091125/regulatory.bin: binary file contents changed
dpkg-source: error: add wireless-regdb-20091125/regulatory.bin in debian/source/include-binaries if you want to store the modified binary in the debian tarball
dpkg-source: error: unrepresentable changes to source

After working around this issue and building again, I get some files in
debian/patches, you probably need to remove .custom on clean:

pabs@chianamo:~/tmp/crda-1.1.1$ tail -n4 debian/patches/debian-changes-1.1.1-1
--- /dev/null
+++ crda-1.1.1/wireless-regdb-20091125/.custom
@@ -0,0 +1 @@

dpkg-shlibdeps complains that neither crda and regdbdump use symbols
from libssl, it looks like this might be a false positive though:

dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: dependency on libssl.so.0.9.8 could be avoided if "debian/crda/sbin/regdbdump debian/crda/sbin/crda" were not uselessly linked against it (they use none of its symbols).

V=1 needs to be set on the make command-line so that the buildds
verbosely print all the commands used to build everything.

There are two lintian complaints:

P: crda: no-upstream-changelog
N:    The package does not install an upstream changelog file. If upstream
N:    provides a changelog, it should be accessible as
N:    /usr/share/doc/<pkg>/changelog.gz.
N:    It's currently unclear how best to handle multiple binary packages from
N:    the same source. Some maintainers put a copy of the upstream changelog
N:    in each package, but it can be quite long. Some include it in one
N:    package and add symlinks to the other packages, but this requires there
N:    be dependencies between the packages. Some only include it in a
N:    "central" binary package and omit it from more ancillary packages.
N:    Refer to Debian Policy Manual section 12.7 (Changelog files) for
N:    details.
N:    Severity: pedantic, Certainty: wild-guess

I'd suggest that 'make dist' should include a ChangeLog file in the
tarball, generated with git2cl or git log or whatever. A NEWS file
summarising the user-visible changes in each version would also be a
good idea for both crda and wireless-regdb.

W: crda: new-package-should-close-itp-bug
N:    This package appears to be the first packaging of a new upstream
N:    software package (there is only one changelog entry and the Debian
N:    revision is 1), but it does not close any bugs. The initial upload of a
N:    new package should close the corresponding ITP bug for that package.
N:    This warning can be ignored if the package is not intended for Debian or
N:    if it is a split of an existing Debian package.
N:    Refer to Debian Developer's Reference section 5.1 (New packages) for
N:    details.
N:    Severity: normal, Certainty: certain

Someone needs to step up to be the maintainer of the package, retitle
#536502 to an ITP (intent to package) and set themselves as the owner:


I assume that the Debian installer should definitely install
crda/wireless-regdb on systems that have a wireless card. Should it also
be installed on other systems by default, in case a wireless card gets
installed? There is also existing systems to consider, how would you
recommend crda/wireless-regdb be pulled in? Currently I'm thinking the
Linux kernel images should Recommend crda; this would pull it in by
default for those using Debian kernel images but allow those who do not
need it to remove it. People compiling their own kernel will need to
install it manually.



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: