Hi Malihe,
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 04:20:40PM +0430, Malihe Asemani wrote:
> I think the packaging process is almost done.
:-)
> I have just some questions.
>
> 1) I dont know if there is a special format for README, copyright and NEWS
> or not? I just used the format which was used in the other packages like
> suitename, as you know ;)
You mean debian/README.Debian (which is basically free form) and
debian/NEWS.Debian (which follows a debian/changelog syntax but is *not*
needed here since we have no news compared to previous versions of this
package)
> Also, 'debchange' caused I wonder if there are some other special commands
> for creating or editing these files (just like debchange)?
Not that I'd be aware of.
> 2) I saw a warning on lintian's output about manpages.
>
> W: king-probe: binary-without-manpage usr/bin/king-probe
>
> Does every package need to have a manpage?
There is no strict need (otherwise you would get a lintian error instead
of a warning) but it would be really nice to have one.
> Even if the upstream has not any
> specific documentation in source code? Again, Is there some tools to
> automate creation or editing manpages (their format is unknown for me!
I usually install the package and run the script through help2man.
Since I tend to forget help2man options I created this small script
https://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/debian-med/trunk/helper-scripts/createmanpages?view=markup
where you need to replace some stings in "<>". In the end you get an
URL where you can find help about editing manpages.
> 3) In our first discussions on this package, you mentioned that I need a
> get-orig for king-probe, cause lack of upstream tagging mechanism. I'm not
> sure if I understand the problem correctly or not? Is the problem related
> to the 'zip' word in the 'king-probe_2.13.110909.zip.orig.tar.gz', when the
> uscan command is used to download the source and create the orig file?
May be I was misleaded by some other package. Uscan does a reasonable
job so there is no need for an get-orig-source target.
> 4) There is a Lintian warning which I have not any idea how can i resolve
> it:
>
> W: king-probe: hardening-no-relro usr/lib/debian-med/bin/probe
>
> As mentioned in [1], it seems I need "DEB_BUILD_HARDENING=1".
This is default and should not be necessary any more.
> Also, some others have mentioned you have not faced into this problem if
> you are using "d/compat 9" and "dh_auto_*" rules. I don't know what is
> caused this issue?
You need to check the Makefile that CFLAGS and LDFLAGS are *really*
propagated to the gcc command line. Most upstreams are quite sloppy
here. Without testing a patch
--- a/Makefile.linux
+++ b/Makefile.linux
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
MACHINEFLAGS =
-CFLAGS = $(MACHINEFLAGS)
+CFLAGS += $(MACHINEFLAGS)
LFLAGS = -lm $(MACHINEFLAGS)
OBJLIST = dots.o abin.o readPDBrecs.o geom3d.o utility.o select.o \
parse.o atomprops.o stdconntable.o autobondrot.o
@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ OBJLIST = dots.o abin.o readPDBrecs.o geom3d.o utility.o select.o \
cc -c $*.c $(CFLAGS)
probe: probe.o $(OBJLIST)
- cc -o $@ probe.o $(OBJLIST) $(LFLAGS)
+ cc -o $@ probe.o $(OBJLIST) $(LFLAGS) $(LDFLAGS)
clean:
@rm -f *.o *.ckp
Please try and check your build log file whether the relro option is
propagated.
Kind regards
Andreas.
> [1].
> https://wiki.debian.org/Hardening#DEB_BUILD_HARDENING_RELRO_.28ld_-z_relro.29
>
--
http://fam-tille.de