Re: RFS: lockrun
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 09:31:00PM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
> Sure, the CDBS magic is fine, although being magic behind the scene could be
> dangerous sometimes. It is Debian Policy #4.9 which says: "The binary target
> must be all that is necessary for the user to build the binary package(s)
> produced from this source package". A `must', but `fakeroot debian/rules
> binary' yields:
>
> sed "s/@version@/0~20080520/" < lockrun.c > lockrun.sed.c
> cc lockrun.sed.c -o lockrun
> cp lockrun debian/lockrun/usr/bin
> help2man -N -n "a cron job overrun protection utility" ./lockrun > lockrun.1
> help2man: can't get `--help' info from ./lockrun
> make: *** [common-install-prehook-impl] Error 2
>
> Seems like cdbs magic doesn't cope with that, but you can still save the day:
> clean:: unpatch
> common-install-prehook-impl:: patch
This is a bug in CDBS, I have reported it as #486848:
http://bugs.debian.org/486848
I have added the following line as a temporary workaround:
binary-arch binary-indep: build
> 2) Regenerating source files (the sed line) during the build process could be
> a weird source of troubles. Next, we end up having one single C file and two
> ways of modifying it
This has been changed so that we generate lockrun.sed.c from lockrun.c instead.
I don't really see any problems with this method.
> 3) No diff.gz found on mentors - probably a native package done by incident ?
Yes, sorry about that, my mistake. Fixed now.
> 4) You can add a watch file, also.
The upstream does not use version numbers so a watch file would be pointless.
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 03:20:27PM -0500, Raphael Geissert wrote:
> By the way, where did you get this line from?
> > Copyright: Copyright 2008, Stephen J. Friedl <steve@unixwiz.net>
>
> I don't see any statement in the .c file that it is copyrighted. And as the
> file is in public domain, it may actually be possible that there's no
> copyright at all.
Yes, I think you are correct. Removed now.
> > No, blank lines are allowed in the debian/copyright file.
>
> What I meant was that I don't know if you should place the extra lines for
> License: _after_ their usage. It's strange, nothing else.
Fixed.
> >> debian/patches/command-option.patch:
>
> Did you notice the patch is not clean? :)
> > Binary files lockrun-1.orig/lockrun and lockrun-1.orig.new/lockrun differ
I have edited the patch and this problem no longer persists.
I sent the patch to the upstream and I have not had any reply yet, I sent
another reminder today - until such time I have removed my patched changes that
alter the case to the `lockrun` command options.
The new package has been uploaded, and as a reminder:
dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/lockrun/lockrun_0~20080520-1.dsc
Thanks,
--
Noah Slater, http://bytesexual.org/nslater/
Reply to: