Re: libbioinfoc-0.1.0 debian package: .deb files lacking library
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 09:38:29PM +0200, Detlef wrote:
> The bioinfoclib subset we worked on is now compiling and testing fine
> with GNU autoconf/automake, thus I have now an "upstream tarball" and
> a debian subdirectory.
Could you please do us a favour and
a) upload your upstream tarball to sf.net
b) commit the packaging to Debian Med version control system
(SVN or Git at your personal preference) - if you have no
idea how to do this please read the according chapter in our
team policy and ask back if you might face some showstoppers.
> Now the problem:
> fakeroot ./debian/rules binary
> produces .deb files as expected, but these don't contain the desired
> However I see the library gets built into
> libbioinfoc-0.1.0/debian/tmp/usr/lib, and 'make check' is executed a
> library-based test program just fine.
> How could that be fixed?
I guess it will be quite simple to fix but I see no point in
establishing a different workflow to what we are usually working.
I probably would like to commit some changes to your packaging
but I can't to a download tarball as you are providing.
> Is it something with the debian/control file?
Probably not. You are lacking an install file.
> Are there examples I could learn from?
Yep, there are several examples for library packaging in our Git and
SVN. For libraries I'm usually recommending d-shlibs and you can grep
for this if you check out the SVN packaging tree. In Git we have
bambamc, bamtools and snp-sites as examples.
> Help is appreciated.
> In case somebody would like to take a closer look -- the files are here:
> Using this file, reproducing the problem should be easy:
> unpack this file, cd to debianmed_bioinfoc_2014-04-22 and say "fakeroot
> ./debian/rules binary".
I promise to help but only for the usual workflow - so please follow our
team policy and commit your packaging.