Re: RFS: knetstats
Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote:
> I've re-uploaded the package. Please have a look at it.
* you should not bump the revision, -1 was not uploaded to debian.
>> your package is a native package, don't do this. additionally, please
>> fix the following things:
>
> I wasn't able to understand much about this issue (Maybe because I've not done
> much reading).
you shall not include the debian/ directory in the upstream tarball
(tar.gz), but have a orig.tar.gz and seperate diff.gz containing the
debian/* files and every other modification you did.
> There are many packages which don't have a proper version
> format. How do the maintainers tackle such software ?
i don't know what you mean with this.
>> * this is ugly (in README.Debian):
> I didn't understand this much.
>
> ---snipp---
> -- Ritesh Raj Sarraf <r...@researchut.com>, Sun, 12 Nov 2006 00:55:48 +0530
> ---snapp--
>
> and this is beautiful:
>
> ---snip---
> -- Ritesh Raj Sarraf <r...@researchut.com> Sun, 12 Nov 2006 00:55:48 +0530
> ---snapp---
>
> note that only the comma is different after your email address.
>
>
> FIXED
nope, you removed the comma instead of replacing it with a space.
> * this is wrong:
>
> ---snipp---
> Homepage: http://knetstats.sourceforge.net/
> ---snapp---
>
> and this is right:
>
> ---snipp---
> Homepage: http://knetstats.sourceforge.net/
> ---snapp---
>
> note the *two* leading spaces.
>
> Not sure what it was. Maybe FIXED.
nope, there is still only one leading space in bevore Homepage.
> * don't add README to docs, it doesn't contain any usefull
> information.
>
> But I've seen many of the applications carrying the README files also.
> Whether they are useful or not depends upon what information one is trying to
> look at.
if the README file contains usefull information about the software, then
it is of course good to include it.
if the README file contains only information on how to compile the
package, the file is useless because we already distribute the binary.
here, the README file does not even contain any usefull information at all.
> * remove the useless commented things in debian/rules and
> debian/watch.
> FIXED
nope. rules still contains a lot of commented, useless and not used dh_*
calls. remove them.
> * your package does not build, it is missing some of the kde build
> depenendcies.
> This is what confused me the most. If I follow the tricks mentioned in the
> package build docs, it gives me a huge list of packages which I should add as
> Build-Depends. I don't think adding 30 package names in Build-Depends makes
> sense (and is the right way).
now, it builds.
> What practise do you/others follow for finding Build Dependency packages?
you should add the direct depends, not the indirect ones. e.g. if your
package needs kdelibs, you should add kdelibs, but not all the
(build)-depends of kdelibs too. similar with any other build-depends.
> * your manpage does not get installed, you have to use debian/manpage
> for that (read man dh_installman)
> FIXED
if you add a manpage, you should place it in the debian directory, not
into the upstream sources.
additonally:
* you should build with DH_VERBOSE enabled by default.
* i suggest to include a xpm file and add it to menu.
--
Address: Daniel Baumann, Burgunderstrasse 3, CH-4562 Biberist
Email: daniel.baumann@panthera-systems.net
Internet: http://people.panthera-systems.net/~daniel-baumann/
Reply to: