Re: Lintian's warnings : ldconfig call is useless and unsafe...
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 11:08:03AM +0100, Corentin Desfarges wrote:
>
> >When I builded commit
> >ID aebf1274866f7e5417efdd4ee8aa3fbdf50e6dc1 and using the last lintian
> >version from unstable (which might be more picky than some other
> >version) I've got:
> >E: fw4spl source: source-is-missing Apps/VRRender/doc/source/_static/jquery.js
> > -> Seems to remain
>
> I thought it was fixed by the commit b713ebad050ea798e8e57710ae5b212888a48d32, in
> which I exluded the Apps/VRRender/doc directory from d/copyright. I guess I
> misunderstood your answer about it. Is is not enough ? Must I to remove them
> from the upstream tarball ?
Files-Excluded has the explicite purpose to exclude (==remove) files
from the upstream tarball.
> I'd rather don't do that because I guess that if this
> files are there, developers had certainly a good reason. But I'm not sure.
You need to symlink to the debian packaged version using dh-linktree.
If it is not clear what to do I'd recommend checking some example
package (for instance gnumed-client).
> >W: fw4spl source: changelog-should-mention-nmu
> >W: fw4spl source: source-nmu-has-incorrect-version-number 0.9.2-1
> > -> Seems you fixed both in last commit
>
> Yes I do. It was caused by different email addresses and names between d/control
> and d/changelog.
Yes. :-)
> >I: fw4spl source: quilt-patch-missing-description remove_fwItkIOTest.patch
> >I: fw4spl source: quilt-patch-missing-description set_media_as_bundle.patch
> >I: fw4spl source: quilt-patch-missing-description add_easy_launcher.patch
> >I: fw4spl source: quilt-patch-missing-description fix_unit_tests.patch
> > -> Please add DEP3 descriptions (if in doubt what this mean you might like
> > to use `lintian -i ...`).
>
> I work on it today.
Fine.
> >W: fw4spl: binary-without-manpage usr/bin/launcher
> >W: fw4spl: binary-without-manpage usr/bin/launcher-0.1
> > -> Would be nice to have but we could live with this for the moment.
> > However, what I'm more concerned about is the very generic name of the
> > binary. I wonder whether /usr/bin/fw4spl or /usr/bin/fw4spl-launcher
> > would be more apropriate and this also should be suggested to upstream.
>
> Short and simple manpages have been added by the last commit.
I noticed this after sending my mail.
> About the binary name, I agree
> with you, I work in it the afternoon.
As I said: I also recommend discussing this with upstream.
> >Since I'm a bit in a hurry I'd recommend to ask on
> >debian-mentors@lists.debian.org where this kind of question is easily
> >handled.
>
> Yes I'll ask them about it.
Thanks for your patience to investigate this.
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: