Re: [RFC/RFS] adm8211-source - driver for ADMtek wifi card
Thanks for all these comments. It's always a great feeling to discover
that someone took time to look at what you did - even if to report that
you did a lot of stupid things :)
I took them seriously, so I'll report everything that I noticed while
doing so. Please don't get me wrong - I'm just trying to figure out how
things work - and fix little quirks I find while doing so.
I plan to keep a single changelog entry until package is "officially"
issued. Is this ok ? As a side effect, using -v wouldn't be required.
debian/changelog - add (Closes: #333237) - when someone sponsors the
upload, make sure they build the package with the "-v 0.0.20050620-1"
option to debuild/dpkg-buildpackage. That way all the changlog entries
will be included in the upload and your ITP bug will be closed.
OK. Just to be sure: the example that developers-reference points to
(docbook-dsssl) isn't using the same syntax that what the document says
(Home page instead of Homepage) - do I report bug on
developers-reference (pick another sample which does what is
recommended), docbook-dsssl (non-compliance to recommendation) or both ?
In line with the developers reference, I recommend you change the last
two lines of debian/control to this:
Standards-Version is only 3 numbers - 1.2.3.X releases are all
compatible - only minor changes like typos/etc.
Ok. Wishlist bug to lintian so it gets checked ? It wasn't my idea...
I'll have to investigate more on that one. I get the point, but I'm not
sure what I'll do. I tried without and it doesn't work, but I didn't
tried with udev yet. Suggestions welcome !
Depends: hotplug - hmm, this is tricky, since hotplug is being replaced
by udev right now - check the debian-devel archives for more
debian/copyright: I would make some stylistic changes:
Changed copyright entries and removed FSF address. OK.
OK. I'm always reluctant to trash documentation, especially on source
packages, but I think you're right. I'll scan and adjust README.Debian
debian/docs: INSTALL and NOTES-FC2 probably aren't relevant.
debian/README.Debian: I don't see any README file in the source package,
is it generated at build time or something?
It's a typo. Was fixed in the upload that was tested against Sid last week.
debian/README.Debian: AFAIK, module assistant does all the unpacking, no
need to put the cd/tar
Tested, and you're right. I'll update.
debian/rules: Lots of sponsors like it if you remove commedted out dh_*
lines because it makes the rules file look cleaner and is more readable.
Noticed too when testing against Sid. I still need to figure out the
details about what being compliant means before requesting the change in
Trying to build the modules failed for me, I think you have to get
adm8211 registered in the module-assistant package:
I agree that issuing a bug on another package isn't the shortest path,
bug I don't get the "how" part (compliant.list.d). Could you please
link to documentation somewhere or explain your idea ?
Personally, I think there needs to be /usr/share/modass/compliant.list.d
- you may want to file a wishlist bug about this against m-a (in
addition to one asking for adding adm8211-source
This is a dumb rookie mistake. Was clean against Sarge and forgot to
re-check. I feel so bad !!!
Don't forget to check your package with lintian and linda:
W: adm8211-source: package-contains-upstream-install-documentation usr/share/doc/adm8211-source/INSTALL
Already discussed above
I'll file bug reports against developers-reference and debian-policy,
since (at least) those documents weren't updated. See:
E: adm8211-source: old-fsf-address-in-copyright-file
Here is a useful ~/.devscripts file:
export DEBUILD_DPKG_BUILDPACKAGE_OPTS="-us -uc -i -ICVS -I.svn"
I still have to prepare and upload a fixed package. I'll post again
when it's ready.