Re: Wormux 0.7.1-1
Le 26.04.2006 17:16, Alexander Schmehl a écrit :
>Hi!
>
>* artefact <artefact@altern.org> [060426 14:19]:
>[..]
>
>
>>>Did you ran linda? What about piuparts?
>>>
>>>
>>Linda gives the same result.
>>
>>
>
>No, it doesn't:
>
>
Ok, I tried on the .deb files it did not complain...
>====
>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.
>====
>
>
About the font issue, I knew it for a while but I don't know how to get
the path to the font file. I imagine that defoma could be usefull but I
have not seen any package using it. Game packages I've seen until then
embbed their proper font file.
>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?
>
>
There's an ITP : #352064. Do I add a new Changelog entry or modify the
"Initial release" one ?
>- debian/compat should be 5 if you are using debhelper >4
>
>
I would like to keep the compatibility with version 4 in order to
provide unofficial packages for the stable dist. Of course, I could have
2 branches, but does it worth ?
>- 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?
>
>
For the moment, it is not sponsored by anyone. So, you say I am the
Uploader, aren't you the Maintainer ?
> - 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
>
>
Why not...
>- 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?
>
>
>
>
Ok, fixing.
>>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
>
>
>
Regards, Jean
--
______________________________________
/ La femme infidèle a des remords, la \
| femme fidèle a des regrets. -+- |
\ Proverbe chinois -+- /
--------------------------------------
\ ^__^
\ (OO)\_______
(__)\ )\/\
||----w |
|| ||
Reply to: