Mauro Lizaur wrote:
As I understand it; this is a "warning" if you have a lot of extra-files like examples or data-files. Then this should go in a dedicated -data package. The warning appears as the package has some C-code and some python scripts, and it sees the pyton scripts as extra-files. So I believe it should be fair to ignore.Hi Andreas, I'm not a DD or a DM, but i while i was checking your package i got these lintian warnings: I: uniconvertor: arch-dep-package-has-big-usr-share 1668kB 87% N: N: The package has a significant amount of architecture-independent data N: in /usr/share, while it is an architecture-dependent package. This is N: wasteful of mirror space and bandwidth, as we then end up with N: multiple copies of this data, one for each architecture. N: N: If the data in /usr/share is not architecture-independent, it is a N: policy violation, and in this case, you should move that data N: elsewhere. N: N: See also: N: http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/ch-best-pkging-practice N: s#s-bpp-archindepdata N:
Looking into other python-packages, this seems to always be non-executable; that's why I let it be. But if this is wrong, I will of course change it.W: uniconvertor: script-not-executable ./usr/share/pycentral/uniconvertor/site-packages/uniconvertor/__init__.py N: N: This file starts with the #! sequence that marks interpreted scripts, N: but it is not executable. N:
Right now it builds for the default python-version avaible. If the default change, a recompile is the only thin needed. Is it better practice to have it build itself for multiple python-versions at the same time?i would recommend you to check these, and try to make it work for all the versions of python available (ie 2.4 and 2.5, now just builds for python 2.4)
Cheers, Andreas