Hello Rogério,
----
Am Thu, 19 Nov 2009 04:45:42 -0200 schrieb
Rogério Brito <rbrito@ime.usp.br>:
> You should still give a hint (a short phrase is enough) that other
> people worked on the package and give them credit.
Done.
> > > * you can remove comments from the watch file.
> > Some lines came from the template.
>
> Just kill them. The templates serve as examples for people to know what
> values to put in the appropriate fields.
Done.
> > > * why do you have two patches to xferc? The patches have no comments on
> > > them (See DEP-3).
> > I should use better names for patches.
>
> Right. If you find some time, just put a description there so that
> people that will possibly make a non-maintainer upload understand why
> the patch is there.
Done.
> > > * why does it get compiled with -O3? Why not -O2? Why not -Os
> > > (especially useful for machines without a lot of cache).
> > I think this should be checked together with upstream - that's right?
>
> No, this one should be fixed. Getting rid of the unconditional -O3, the
> -ffast-math, -fomit-frame-pointer and so on should be done as a way to
> control how the builds happen.
>
> 1 - Somebody may want to use the (Debian-policy described) variable
> DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=noopt to disable optimization (to hunt some potential
> bug), but, as you package is right now, it always compiles with
> optimizations turned on.
>
> These options get set in configure and configure.in. You can change
> those and convince upstream to flexibilize things a little bit.
>
The upstream author hase defined in configure[.in]:
if test "x$enable_debug" = "xyes" ; then
CXXFLAGS="${CXXFLAGS} -Wall -g -DDEBUG"
elif test "x$enable_release" = "xyes" ; then
CXXFLAGS="${CXXFLAGS} -DNDEBUG"
if test "${GXX}" = "yes" ; then
CXXFLAGS="${CXXFLAGS} -O3 -Wuninitialized -ffast-math \
-fomit-frame-pointer -fno-strict-aliasing" fi
else
CXXFLAGS="${CXXFLAGS} -O2"
fi
Should I remove / reduce (per patch) this and define it in debian/rules?
At first step I have no "enable_debug" and no "enable_release", so it
comes only with "-O2".
> > > * can't you compile the C++ code with -Wextra and -Weffc++? This way,
> > > more warnings could be emitted and some potential bug that is lurking
> > > there would just be discovered soon.
> > I can do it for testing. But I think this is the job for the upstream
> > developer, isn't it?
>
> Yes, it is. But it already reveals some code improvements.
Ok, I will look for.
> Oh, as a last point, just give a look at the output of lintian. It's
> telling some things that are ultra-easy to fix.
Lintian seems clean (with version 2.2.18).
Thanks for your detailed support!
Fondest regards,
Joachim Wiedorn
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature