Re: RFS: xpn

[Patrick Schoenfeld <schoenfeld@in-medias-res.com>]

Michael Krauss wrote:
> Are you sure, that the executable bit isn't set?

Yes.

> Here i get the following:
> mickraus@gandalf:~$ ls -l /usr/share/xpn/xpn.sh
> -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 559 2007-09-03 20:41 /usr/share/xpn/xpn.sh

That is why you should use something like pbuilder etc. to test your
packaging, cause its bad to test things in an environment where other
conditions might be met. Just sidenoted.

> Done. I am always afraid of that kind of program, which expects a new
> line at the end of a file. I am sorry.

Well, i think not everybody finds that bad. I find it ugly. Thats why i
told you to better remove it.

>> * debian/rules contains some not neccessary empty lines
> 
> Deleted some. Only the empty lines between two make targets remain.

Yeah, fine. Those empty lines between the targets are good. I just
thought that those empty lines in between commands in a target are
silly, or double-empty lines.

So well:
I have checked your new version -4 and I'm afraid that it builds up a
bogus link to the binary. You must not use absolute pathes in the links,
as this will fail on systems other then the one were the package is
built (and ofcourse it will not work after removing the src directory)-
I would recommend you to use dh_link.

Regards,
Patrick