Re: RFS: volume.app - A dockapp enabling esay control of the volume level
El sáb, 16-04-2005 a las 15:18 +0200, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt escribió:
> Carlos Parra <carlospc@gmail.com> writes:
> > Package name : volume.app
> [...]
> > This program it's quite simple, and have been orphaned for a while... i
> > use it frequently, that's the reason i would like to adopt it.
>
> Well, there are *3* bugs about this. In your changelog, you only close
> one (which is merged with another one, but this leaves #302588).
In http://bugs.debian.org/volume.app there is just one bug (#302588),
this bug was open by me in a mistake. The bug i close in changelog is
#274281, that's the bug of "orphaned package". AFAIK, there aren't more
bug's for this package.
I've wrote in changelog:
* New maintainer (Closes: #274281, #302588)
> There was the suggestion to change the package name to something without
> the ".app" suffix (which is used for GNUStep packages). Please do this
> change, but read the documentation about the migration to a new package
> *before* you do it.
The real name of the project is "volume.app", do you suggest any name
instead of it? volume-app?
> Anyway, the rest of the package is horribly broken.
>
> * debian/control:
> + Please replace the xlibs-dev dependency with the -dev packages you
> actually need (xlibs-dev was split some time ago and is a
> meta-package nowadays)
Already done :)
Build-Depends: debhelper (>> 3.0.0), libx11-dev, libxext-dev, libxi-dev,
x-dev, libxpm-dev
> + You only need 3.6.1 in the Standards-Version, the last part of the
> version number is not important and is bumped for fixes that don't
> change the meaning of the policy.
changed
> + AFAICS, volume.app only works with OSS mixers, if this is correct,
> you should put in the description
changed:
Description: dockapp enabling easy control of the volume level
A small graphical software utility enabling quick and convenient
control of a computer's audio volume level. It requires an Open Sound
System (OSS)-compatible sound driver. It is...
> * debian/copyright:
> + Please say who actually owns the copyright.
changed:
This program is Copyright (C) 2002-2005 Daniel Richard G.
<skunk@alum.mit.edu>
> + This (and i quote it, because i want to use it as example for the
> rest of the list) neither lists the copyright owner(s) nor does it
> clarify the license, it is just b0rken:
> | Copyright:
> |
> | GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE
> | Version 2, June 1991
> |
> | Free Software Foundation
> | 59 Temple Place - Suite 330
> | Boston, MA 02111-1307, USA
> | Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies
> | of this license document, but changing it is not allowed.
> Please replaces this with the correct copyright information, a
> valid license statement and a reference to the GPLv2 file in
> /usr/share/common-licenses. Please also note that the actual
> license is GPLv2 or higher.
changed:
Copyright:
GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE
Version 2, June 1991
Copyright (C) 1989, 1991 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307 USA
Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies
of this license document, but changing it is not allowed.
On Debian GNU/Linux systems, the complete text of the GNU General Public
License (Version 2) can be found in `/usr/share/common-licenses/GPL-2`
> * debian/dirs:
> + You don't need this file, make install creates the needed dirs.
> + Why do you create usr/sbin?
deleted
> * debian/docs:
> + The documents listed here are passed as CLI argument to
> dh_installdocs in debian/rules. You don't need the file.
deleted
> * debian/rules:
> + Remove the configure targets, you don't use (nor need) them.
deleted
> + The CFLAGS magic: You don't use CFLAGS (which you should do), so
> either remove it or use it to tell make what to do.
deleted
> + The INSTALL_PROGRAM magic: Remove it, you use dh_strip.
deleted
> + Remove all the dh_ calls in binary-arch that are in comments and
> therefore not used.
done
>
> Marc
I've uploaded the new package with all the changes:
http://www.carlospc.org/debian/volume.app/
I think that volume.app is ok, but if anybody think that it has to be
changed, i will do it, of course.
Thanks a lot to Marc :)
Reply to: