Hi!
* artefact <artefact@altern.org> [060426 14:19]:
[..]
> >Did you ran linda? What about piuparts?
> Linda gives the same result.
No, it doesn't:
====
alex@annuminas:/var/cache/pbuilder/result$ linda
wormux_0.7.1-1_i386.changes
W: wormux; The font wormux-0.7.1/data/font/DejaVuSans.ttf in package ttf-dejavu is considered to be a duplicate.
W: wormux; A binary links against a library it does not use symbols from
W: wormux-data; The font /usr/share/games/wormux/font/DejaVuSans.ttf in package ttf-dejavu is considered to be a duplicate.
====
Beside the already mentioned FTBFS because of a missing
Build-Dependency on libsdl-net1.2-dev here some other remakrs:
- debian/changelog:
I don't see you closing any Bug with your initial release; did you
send an ITP before you started packaging it?
- debian/compat should be 5 if you are using debhelper >4
- debian/control
- if your package is in the pkg-games svn repo, and sponsored by an
member of that team, shouldn't the mainter set to them and you just
an uploader?
- According to Developers Reference [1] there should be a additional
space at the Homepage semi-header of the long descritpion
- IIRC someone (Eddy?) proposed to add to the long descrition, that
there are currently no AI opponents
- debian/dirs
is empty, so it could be removed
- debian/docs lists README, which is in french... hmmm... maybe that
file should be renamed to README.fr?
- debian/README.Debian What's the purpouse of listing which release
this package should work on? You can read it, after you installed it,
and after you tried to install it, you allready know if it fits your
release; beside that's wrong, since your package - once uploaded to
Debian - will be build against an sid build evnironment; do to changes
in the tool chain after the sarge release (new libc, new c compiler),
the resulting binary package won't work on a sarge system
- You supply a manpage allready compiled from xml... I think it would be
a good idea to compile the manpage while building the package to
avoid possible incorrect manpage when it's changed but forgot to
rebuild it by hand; after all - that's what the build-system is for,
isn't it?
> I did not run piuparts on it but the packages does not contain nor
> [pre|post]-install script nor configuration file. I cannot imagine it
> could have some bad influence on the system.
piuparts test more than that, e.g. clean updates from one package
release, e.g. when moving files from one package to an other and similar
things.
It can't hurt to test it, even if you can't think af any bad influence.
> It is only a game...
So what?
That doesn't mean it shoudln't be in the best possible shape, does it?
Links:
1: http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/ch-best-pkging-practices.en.html#s-bpp-upstream-info
Yours sincerely,
Alexander
--
http://learn.to/quote/
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature