Re: RFS: sctplib
* Thomas Dreibholz <dreibh@iem.uni-due.de> [080508 14:54]:
> sctplib still has quite a lot of users and I have been asked regularly for
> up-to-date packages. Therefore, I have updated the Debian package to the
> latest sctplib version.
Incomplete list of issues:
- debian/rules needs some care. your install targets need to depend on
the build targets, the build targets should actually do something
instead of only configuring.
- The -doc package ist just mostly empty.
- I'd say it does not make much sense to start the long
descriptions of the packages with an empty line. (and be different for
those packages)
- upstream adds strange things to CFLAGS (especially -O3 -g0 or -g3 -O0
overwriting anything given to it from debian/rules).
- a symbols file would be nice for the future to make sure programs depending
on that do not get inflated dependencies.
- a debian revision of "-1unstable" looks strange
- the -dev package should get a versioned dependency on the library
(where would that .so symlink point at if there was a different
version installed?)
- the source contains a couple of rfc file. It's copyright is not listed
in debian/copyright and it looks non-free (at least it seems to
heavily restrict modifing)
- some more copyrights seem to be missing (like manual/fixunder.sty,
...)
- perhaps more, I stopped looking here...
Hochachtungsvoll,
Bernhard R. Link
--
"Never contain programs so few bugs, as when no debugging tools are available!"
Niklaus Wirth
Reply to: