Re: RFS: gdisk (updated package)
2010/5/3 Guillaume Delacour <gui@iroqwa.org>:
> I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.6.7-1
> of my package "gdisk".
I'm not sponsoring extra packages at the moment, nor do I have GPT
hardware, but here is a review:
You should never ever manually add dependencies on a library, always
leave that up to the shlibs mechanism.
You might want to consider adopting debhelper 7 and DEP-5:
https://penta.debconf.org/dc9_schedule/events/418.en.html
http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep5/
Having these options in the g++ flags is a bad idea: -L/opt/local/lib
-L/usr/local/lib
The upstream README includes installation instructions, please ask
upstream to separate that out into README.install since it is useless
to users of packages.
The upstream CHANGELOG file looks like it should be renamed to NEWS:
http://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/standards.html#NEWS-File
http://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/standards.html#Change-Logs
The upstream manual page suggests that gdisk is beta and is fairly
buggy. Should you mention this in the package description? Should such
buggy software really be in Debian?
dh_installman installs manual pages in a policy-compliant way, no need
to do it manually.
crc32.* are GPLv2+ while the rest seems to be GPLv2, you should
probably document that in debian/copyright.
gdisk is available in several other distributions, you can use 'whohas
gdisk' to find out where. There don't appear to be any bugs/patches,
but you should check for them now and then.
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
Reply to: