Re: Could anybody check my package?
On Sun, May 12, 2002 at 10:21:36PM +0200, Aaron Isotton wrote:
> I have obtained permission from upstream to package 'sitemap', Eric
> S. Raymond's Python script to generate HTML site maps.
> I have packaged it, it works on my machine, and lintian has nothing to
> complain. I have uploaded all files to
> Could anybody please check whether there are some obvious bugs in
> them? And while I'm at it, what are all the files generated by
> dpkg-buildpackage good for? I understand the .deb and the .dsc ones,
> but I'm unsure about the other ones.
I have downloaded and had a quick look at your package.
Just a few (fairly minor) points:
Do I understand it correctly that the *only* executable intended to be in
the package is a python script? If this is the case then it should be:
in debian/control rather than
as you have it. There is no need for all of Debian's architectures to have
a specific version of the package.
Are you sure that just depending on "python" is enough? I have no idea if
it is or not, but it seems a little slim to me. The easy way to check is to
build a chroot with *only* the base files installed (you can use debootstrap
to do this easily), install python, and then install the sitemap deb. If
everything works as expected then you are good to go. If not then you
probably need more Depends. It is entirely possible that a bare python is
enough, I have not looked all that closely at the script to see what it uses.
There are a *lot* of comments in debian/rules that are left over from
dh_make. This is generally considered bad style. It doesn't make any
functional difference, but reducing the commented calls is not a bad idea.
# Add here commands to configure the package.
# We have nothing to do by default.
are kinda fugly IMO. They are only there to remind you what you need to do
in adapting debian/rules from the dh_make boilerplate. Once you have
adapted it, these comments should be removed. (this is ONLY a question of
style though, it makes no functional difference at all).
debian/copyright (rightly) says that the license is GPL. It needs to say
where a copy of the GPL is on Debian systems (/usr/share/common-licenses).
If you have a look at the copyright file for apt-spy for example (may as
well plug my own packages :), it says pretty much everything you need to say
in a debian/copyright. Feel free to copy and adapt it (I know that's where
*I* got it from :)
debian/dirs needs to end with a newline
debian/control needs to end with a newline
That's all the nitpicks I can see for now (and there really aren't many).
All in all a nice package. Well done.
If you were hoping to get it included in Debian, I would be happy to sponsor
it for you after it has been cleaned up a little (and it only needs a little).
Have you had a look at the information on
As to the various files and what they are:
*.dsc; Debian Source Control.
This is pretty much a copy of debian/control, and the names of the files
that make up the source package (the orig.tar.gz and the diff.gz)
*.orig.tar.gz; Upstream source
This is the source of the uptream program.
This is the Debian specific differences. It is generally considered a
Good Thing(tm) to keep the upstream sources as pristine as possible, and
make any changes that have to be made in the diff.
*.changes Pretty similar to the .dsc, but some subtle differences in the
fields listing binary packages (the .dsc lists the packages that *can* be
produced, and the .changes lists the packages that *were* produced), the
list of files in the .changes is the list of files that need to be uploaded
(generally this does not include the .orig.tar.gz unless it is a -1 debian
revision, but does include the diff.gz, .dsc and any .debs that have been
produced during building). It also contains a copy of the most recent
The point of the whole exercise :) This is what the end user will
download and install.
Hope that makes things clearer for you. Most (if not all) of this is
explained in the Debian Policy, which you should be able to recite backwards
in your sleep :)
PS. Do you have a GPG key?
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org