Re: [fis-gtm] builds with pbuilder
Hi Amul,
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 12:32:44PM -0500, Amul Shah wrote:
> >the trouble with the dirty tarball and can straight import from upstream.
> >But finally it is your choice to do it right now.
>
> [amul:5] For GIT conversion, I found the following links. I'll give them a try once we're ready to release the V6.0-001 package/
> http://wiki.debian.org/Alioth/Git#Convert_a_SVN_Alioth_repository_to_Git
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-med/2009/11/msg00006.html
This is the link I had in mind.
> [amul:5] Let's not wait for V6.0-002. I have a strong feeling that
> we will need some deployment changes to the package that we won't
> find in my simple tests. And by strong feeling, I mean that I've
> been burned often enough by small deployment problems
For sure you decide here. Just go on and let us know here if you need
help. As I said before: If it turns out to be a problem I personally
would not consider the full history as a very important thing to keep.
> >>What remains:
> >>- I need a DEP3 compliant explanation of the suppression of the gtmsechr setuid and permissions.
>
> [amul:5] Where should I put the explanation for the suppression options?
>
> [amul:5] How is the following for a DEP3 compliant explanation?
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Author: Amul Shah <Amul.Shah@fisglobal.com>
> Description: FIS GT.M uses a setuid binary to facilitate multi-user access to database shared memory
That's fine and belongs strait at the head of the patch file. (Just
have a look into patch files of other packages to see how it is used.)
> FIS GT.M (hereby referred to as just GT.M) processes run with normal
> UNIX user and group ids. GT.M has no database daemon that needs to
> ...
That's way to much for the patch description. About one paragraph is
completely sufficient. Finally it is a developer oriented information -
if more details might be needed there is a plenty of information out
there.
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: