Re: RFS: sysinfo -- simple GNU/Linux program that displays computer/system information
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: Re: RFS: sysinfo -- simple GNU/Linux program that displays computer/system information
- From: Justin Pryzby <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2005 10:25:28 -0500
- Message-id: <20051207152528.GA27567@andromeda>
- In-reply-to: <email@example.com>
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
On Wed, Dec 07, 2005 at 03:37:19PM +0100, Mario Iseli wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-12-07 at 14:13 +0100, Adriaan Peeters wrote:
> > Hello,
> > I am looking for a sponsor for sysinfo , detailed info below. I
> > already have two packages in Debian: dnstop and sipcalc.
> Hi, i'm not yet a DD. Because i'm sick i have time to review your
> package and i found some mistakes.
> in your diff:
> --- sysinfo-0.6.1.orig/src/Makefile.in
> +++ sysinfo-0.6.1/src/Makefile.in
> This is wrong!! you may not change anything at the orig! If you have to
> apply some changes you should use dpatch and apply the patches by
It is allowed to change things in the orig _by using the diff_. The
orig must be pristine if possible, or be a stripped down version of
the real orig, without any modifications (only the necessary amount of
removals, eg for DFSG-freeness).
Many, many packages have .diff changes outside of ./debian/. Some
prefer to use dpatch or the like to isolate the changes to ./debian/,
and the .orig changes just end up in patchpatch format in
But there is no rule against .diff fragments outside of ./debian/, and
AFAIK its not even strongly recommended; (of course, there are times
when it makes perfect sense: when there are many independent
Debian-specific changes to upstream source).
What is wrong is to have the .diff apply changes to generated code
(such as ./Makefile in an autoconfed tree).
> * Initial Debian Release (Closes: 333680)
> This makes no sense, it is a debian package so the "debian" can be
> ommited, the rest is ok.
Hmmm I think it could make sense. Maybe "initial upload to Debian
archive"? Many times people maintain packages for some time before
finding a sponsor, they even go through * New upstream releases. Its
good practice IMO to keep a changelog during that period, even though
that version is not going to be in Debian.
> please add this below the description:
> Homepage: <URL of upstream homepage>
Please indent the Homepage pseudofield as described at:
#339829: lintian: Please test for best-practice homepage fields
#339826: devref: Please discuss Homepage padding more fully
DevRef 6.2.4: http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/ch-best-pkging-practices.en.html#s-bpp-upstream-info
> It was downloaded from <http:/...> (the crocodiles cannot be ommited).
> Why everywhere those asterisks?
Huh? Are you looking for the full URL? Since its an sf.net download
page, I think this is the best way. See bugs and discussion linked to