Re: [MoM] Packaging OpenSurgSim
Hi Paul,
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 07:00:41PM -0500, Paul Novotny wrote:
> > I also commited another change where I moved the HTML docs to the
> > subdirectory html/. This is what you usually find in Debian packages
> > and I'm close to sure that this best practice can be found somewhere
> > documented. I also provided an accodring doc-base file (pleas pull).
>
> Great. Thanks.
You are welcome.
> > One hint: I intentionally derived from your dh_install call since I
> > usually make use of debian/*.install files. I do not insist in this
> > (actually currently it looks quite unmotivated as the d/rules files
> > looks right now), but I just wanted to demonstrate the option to you.
> > If you would use debian/*.install files consequently you could skip the
> > override_dh_install target which makes d/rules better readable. I'll
> > leave it to you to revert the single *.install file back to d/rules or
> > switch to *.install files consequently. Do whatever matches your taste.
>
> I saw that was the way yaml-cpp did the install, but didn't know what
> was preferred. So I switched it to use the *.install files. I am
> beginning to think that the smaller your debian/rules file is, the
> better.
Yes, that's the idea I intended to implant in your mind even if I'm not
sure there is a written rule about this.
> > I would like you to deal with the following remaining lintian issues:
> >
> > W: opensurgsim-doc: embedded-javascript-library usr/share/doc/opensurgsim-doc/html/jquery.js please use libjs-jquery
> > I: opensurgsim source: wildcard-matches-nothing-in-dep5-copyright Data/Fonts/Vera.ttf (paragraph at line 13)
> > I: opensurgsim source: unused-file-paragraph-in-dep5-copyright paragraph at line 13
> > I: opensurgsim source: duplicate-short-description libopensurgsim libopensurgsim-dev opensurgsim-doc
>
> I think I addressed these issues, and pushed the changes. I also moved
> from using dh_link to dh_linktree. I like how dh_linktree adds the
> needed dependency to the package based on what you link to.
+1
I'm not sure when I will be able to have a (possibly final) look. I'm a
bit busy with real life this weekend but I'll see what I can do. I think
we are so cloes to the final upload that our goal to get the package until
end of february can be considered reached. Considering that it was not
an easy package with the extra need for caring for the extra dependency
I'm quite happy about this.
Thanks for your work
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: