[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Should we package BioConductor TFBSTools? [Was [libtfbs-perl] 04/08: Add upstream's notice of deprecation to the package's description.]

Hi Steffen,

I stumbled upon this old mail.  While nobody has answered so far I'd
like to give some update.

On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 02:27:51PM +0200, Steffen Möller wrote:
> Hello,
> On 21.10.17 10:11, Charles Plessy wrote:
> > Le Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 08:08:49AM +0200, Andreas Tille a écrit :
> >> when reading this commit log:  Should we package Bioconductor TFBSTools?
> >>
> >> This would need at least a hand full of Bioconductor depencencies but
> >> usually it is quite straightforward and can be easily done via
> >>
> >>      dh-make-R --team med --test run-unit-test
> >>
> >> plus editing d/copyright a bit.

This now boils down to simply

     prepare_missing_cran_package TFBSTools

which gives you a set of Git repositories containing the Debian
packaging of the package and all its missing dependencies.  By using the
script itp_from_debian_dir it prepares a text for your ITP bug.  I'm
currently testing this script and used it as another example - so you
can expect the packaging in the new queue in a couple of days.  The
said scripts are in the latest dh-r package.

Attention: Due to bug #897026 I have pinned debhelper to version 11.1.6.
The script fails (unfortunately silently) with any later released
debhelper version.

Kind regards



Reply to: