[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: RFS: audtty

> The package does not build for me. It fails with: Unmet build
> dependencies: automake. I have automake1.4 and automake1.7
> specifically installed. Once I installed the virtual automake (which
> provides automake 1.10), it then built o.k. You may want to specify
> automake1.10 specifically as a Builds-Depends.  You could stick with
> automake, but what happens when the virtual package automake
> provides automake1.11 in the future. Will your package break?
> The changelog shows 2 entries - an initial release and then an
> update. Since this is the first release, why not just one entry?
> Also, you have two bugs open for audtty (one RFP and one ITP). You
> should have retitled the RFP to an ITP and taken it over instead of
> the two separate bugs you now have. You may want to merge them now
> and then close just one bug in your changelog. Any way you do it,
> just make sure both bugs get closed once the package is uploaded.
> Is this a spelling mistake in debian/rules:
> Does it do anything? And why the commented out line:

I fixed the spelling error, and cleaned up the rules file a bit. This rule
tells CDBS that the makefile does not contain a check target, making sure
that it does not attempt to call it.

I cleaned up the build-depends in debian/control, because the automake
dependency was not needed as the only autotool used is autoconf.

> Drop README.Debian since it is empty.
> Remove the comments and cruft from debian/watch. You only need 2
> lines in that file.
> You need to clean up the debian/copyright file. See the package
> csstidy for an example.

I removed the unneeded README.Debian, and cleaned up the debian/watch
file. I also redid the debian/copyright file, as well as the changelog.
The ITP bug was also closed, i changed it so that in the changelog the
package closes the RFP.

I uploaded the fixed packages to mentors.debian.net

Thanks for taking a look at it.

--Chris Taylor

Reply to: