Re: RFS: leo -- a literate editor with outlines for X-Window
On Mon, 24 May 2004 22:08:51 +0200
Jeroen van Wolffelaar <jeroen@wolffelaar.nl> wrote:
> Some remarks, not that I'm not a Debian Developer (yet), but before
> leo can be included in Debian, these issues need to be resolved anyway
Thanks for your reply, its helps a lot.
I repackaged leo, I hope it solves the problems you are pointing out.
You will find it in http://foobbs.org/debian/leo/
> - The .diff.gz is huge, because you included a number of html files
> ripped from a website. Please don't do that this way.
I ripped it off. The contents of this documentation are in the
LeoDocs.leo, anyway.
> - Not your fault (see date of original message), but a new upstream is
> available
Fixed.
> - If you include your own manpage (great that you've written one --
> did you sent it upstream already?), as sgml. You included the
> generated manpage in the .diff.gz: don't do that, have build it into
> debian/<package>, leo.1 is a generated file.
Fixed. I also switched to XML DocBook.
As for sending the man-page upstream, I will make a bundle with some
patches to fix hard-coded paths I needed to change by hand.
> - debian/rules: don't invoke programs with /usr/bin/<program>, but
> simply <program> (docbook-to-man)
Fixed - but this time with xsltproc.
> - You fail to build-depend on debhelper and python
Fixed for debhelper, and for Python there is no build-depend, at least
in the current package.
> - In debian/control, use ${python:Depends}, in stead of hardcoding the
> python dependencies
I tried to use it, but it gives bad results : it does not detects the
need for python-tk, and requires python2.3, even if python2.2 can be
used.
> - I don't think it's priority 'optional', see
> http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-archive#s-priorities
I do not see any other category that could fit. Could you be more
specific ?
> - Description: Capitalize it correctly, and don't start it with 'a',
> but something like 'Literate editor ...'
Fixed. That policy was modified since 2002, isn't it ? I remember being
careful about this point.
> - Remove the dh-make generated example postinst.ex et al
Fixed.
> - debian/changelog: 'This is my first Debian package' -- Is that
> relevant for this very package?
That's in the "Debian New Maintainers' Guide". I removed it.
> - debian/copyright: it has huge lines, you could reformat them to fit
> 78 chars
Fixed, except for the upstream URL.
> - leo(1): It's /usr/share/doc/, not /usr/doc (was already the case in
> 2002)
Fixed.
> - Is it really necessary to have both .GIF and .ico and .bmp's in
> /usr/share/leo/Icons? Also, the 'Thumbs.db' file seems to me as an
> artifect of a certain Operating System, and shouldn't be installed
> in/usr/share
Fixed, the .bmp files do not seem to be used by the package.
> - When running leo just after installing, I get this:
>
> jeroen@mordor-sid5:~$ leo
> Traceback (most recent call last):
> File "/usr/share/leo/leo.py", line 190, in ?
> shutil.copyfile('/etc/leo/leoConfig.leo',
> os.path.join(deb_user_conf_path, '/leoConfig.leo'))
> File "/usr/lib/python2.3/shutil.py", line 38, in copyfile
> fdst = open(dst, 'wb')
> IOError: [Errno 13] Permission denied: '/leoConfig.leo'
>
> Which indicates to me leo is trying to write to the root filesystem.
Fixed. I wrote a specific /usr/bin/leo script to setup user-specific
configuration files.
> Also, upon installation you should somehow create precompiled python
> files (*.pyc). I don't know python myself, but there must be some
> preferred way to do so, iirc there is a (unofficial?) python policy.
Yes : there even are autogenerated postinst and prerm scripts by
debhelper for this. But as Leo has to work with both python2.2 and
python2.3, I do not see a correct way to handle the generation of .pyc
for both versions (except packaging two versions of Leo).
--
Xavier.
Reply to: