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

Re: RFS: mosquitto

On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 7:03 PM, Roger Light <roger@atchoo.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>>>> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: dependency on libgcc_s.so.1 could be avoided
>>>> if "debian/libmosquittopp0/usr/lib/libmosquittopp.so.0" were not
>>>> uselessly linked against it (they use none of its symbols).
>>> I don't know how to fix this. Any suggestions?
>> You should go through the CFLAGS and check to see where it's linking
>> against -lgcc ( IIRC, that could be wrong ).
> It's something that g++ is adding itself, it's not anywhere in CFLAGS
> or CXXFLAGS. That's why it's a confusing warning. Surely it must be
> using symbols, otherwise g++ wouldn't be adding it?

I honestly don't know that much about the build system anymore. I
don't think this is a showstopper :)

There might be a bug with the build system or something ( or it's
doing something "smart", as a "feature" )

>> W: mosquitto: wrong-name-for-upstream-changelog
>> I: python-mosquitto: capitalization-error-in-description python Python
>> I: libmosquitto0-dev: extended-description-is-probably-too-short
>> I: mosquitto: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign
> I've fixed all of these.

Confirmed. Looks ship-shape. New patches look in order, headers and
all. Well done.

>> W: mosquitto-pub: empty-binary-package
>> This is a pretty big issue. Are you not installing things to the .deb?
>> Check the .install ( or makefile ) for that target
> Stupid mistake not renaming the install files after changing the
> names. Fixed for both of them.

Confirmed. Looks good :)

> The remaining lintian notes are:
>> P: libmosquitto0: no-upstream-changelog
> I've left this. The lintian tag page suggests a number of ways of
> dealing with this for multiple binary packages, one of which is to
> include it in the "main" package which is what happens here.

I'm inclined to agree with you. Perhaps a similink if someone is
*crazy* picky about it, but it looks like the other packages all
depend on libmosquittopp, so it's in order ( at least in my eyes ).
Since they're pedantic, it's not even worth overriding.

>> I: libmosquitto0: no-symbols-control-file usr/lib/libmosquitto.so.0
>> I: libmosquittopp0: no-symbols-control-file usr/lib/libmosquittopp.so.0
> I've also left these for the moment. I don't believe they are as
> relevant because this is the first packaged version. Feel free to tell
> me I'm wrong :)

I'm not sure at all, perhaps someone who knows lib packaging better
then me can butt in

> Cheers,
> Roger
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
> Archive: http://lists.debian.org/AANLkTin3DvETPaEaZBxKvi9fkwkk49Vc8cg=MeqEsjVg@mail.gmail.com

100% of the objections I raised look complete.

Well done, really outstanding work. Keep on it!


All programmers are playwrights, and all computers are lousy actors.

#define sizeof(x) rand()

Reply to: