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

Re: Average time to get an answer about package sponsoring



> That was done as shown by [1].
> In my opinion all previous errors rasied by Chris Taylor have been
> solved and i would like to know if i am in a good way to go deeper in
> the package building...
> 

Some comments on the current status of the package:

- Your Build-Depends seem to be by far too stringent on the versions, just don't
  add (>= ...) where you don't need it.
- Remove the manually added Depends: on libc6, libnet1, libpcap, after all this
  is what ${shlibs:Depends} is good for.
- Your debian/changelog requires a cleanup and fixing; it should probably have
  * Initial release (closes: #495959)
  * Corrected ROFF encoding error in file doc/dhcp_probe.8
- Did you send your patches upstream?
- debian/copyright: Please check lines 85 (aclocal.4 doesn't exist) and 94
  (strange character before GNU)
- README.Debian should contain information relevant for the average user, not
  for the package maintainer. Please rename this file to README.source, which
  makes a lot more sense. It need not end up in the .deb
- debian/rules requires a larger overhaul. Please make use of the features of
  Makefiles and don't explicitly call debian/rules but instead depend on the
  proper target; rm -f will never err our, there is not need to test for the
  existence of the to-be-removed files; dh_testdir is sufficient, you don't need
  to add all those files; make distclean will do its job properly, no need to
  remove config.log etc. manually; what is this distclean target doing here? And
  I guess there are some more problems in that file, it definitely requires
  another round of review.

Please fix all those bugs and request another review on the list. Also, please
be a bit more careful, some of the above errors really don't require specific
Debian knowledge (most notably your entries in debian/changelog), but it also
seems that you don't yet have read the packaging how-tos, please do so as we
would ask you to keep maintaining the package in good shape.

Best,
Michael


Attachment: pgp6_m4WryKD1.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: