On Sat, Aug 05, 2006 at 09:40:03AM IST, Paul Wise <pabs3@bonedaddy.net> incoherently babbled: > There is a strange error in your diff.gz: > > $ dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/q/queuegraph/queuegraph_1.1.0-1.dsc > <snip> > dpkg-source: extracting queuegraph in queuegraph-1.1.0 > dpkg-source: unpacking queuegraph_1.1.0.orig.tar.gz > dpkg-source: applying ./queuegraph_1.1.0-1.diff.gz > missing header for unified diff at line 3 of patch > The text leading up to this was: > -------------------------- > |--- queuegraph-1.1.0.orig/ > |+++ queuegraph-1.1.0/ > -------------------------- > No file to patch. Skipping patch. > 1 out of 1 hunk ignored > dpkg-source: failure: patch gave error exit status 1 Hmmm, I'm not sure how to investigate this. All I did was untar the upstream source into my working directory, make my changes and debuild took care of generating my diff against the orig.tar.gz. Any suggestions are welcome. > * debian/control: The latest Standards-Version is 3.7.2, please > read upgrading-checklist.txt and make any changes necessary. Hmmm, 3.7.2 hasn't filtered down to sarge yet. I'll create a sid build environment and look into it. > * debian/control: hmm, should mailgraph go in suggests? A good point, tweeked. > * debian/control: there are no ELF binaries linking to librrd0, > why is it in depends? Also, librrd seems to be called librrd2 > not librrd0 these days. dh_shlibdeps is the correct way to > generate depends on C libraries. I can take out librrd0 in fact. My package only needs librrds-perl, which in turn requires librrd... > * debian/control: until the Homepage field is created and > supported by the various frontends or DWTT[1] is in use, perhaps > you could add the upstream homepage to the description as > specified in the developers reference? Check > * debian/copyright: remove blank line at the end Done. > * debian/copyright: you missed the copyright (or public domain > statement) on your debian packaging It's there, but I've reformatted it and added in dates > * debian/rules: IIRC, dh_clean takes care of removing the > temporary directory used for the package root, no need to rm -rf > them too Oops! Tidied up. > * debian/rules: use dh_install to install the files? Where would I be able to find an example of this being done? > * debian/rules: the rrd database should be created at install time > (in the postinst), shouldn't it? You don't want to overwrite the > database every time you upgrade or reinstall the package. The createrrd.sh script already checks for the existance of the file, but yes, postinst is a better way of doing it, I've moved it not. > * Perhaps you could rewrite the patches so that they can be sent > upstream. I'm thinking either commandline arguments or a > configuration file, or a ./configure script that inserts values > into the cgi script and installs the results. Something so that > every distro doesn't have to patch queuegraph to make it useful. Yes, this is the ideal solution, bt I'm not sure what whether upstream is still maintaining the script. If it is still maintained, then I'm happy to submit patches. Once I've addressed your debian-policy and diff points, I'll upload to mentors.debian.org again. -- Conall O'Brien +353 (0)1 6535148 | sip:31313@blueface.ie http://www.conall.net The marvels of today's modern technology include the development of a soda can, when discarded will last forever ... and a $7,000 car which when properly cared for will rust out in two or three years.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature