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

Re: RFS: klatexformula

Dear mentors,
> On Thursday 18 November 2010 Tobias Winchen wrote:
> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "klatexformula".
> * Package name    : klatexformula
>   Version         : 3.2.1-1
>   Upstream Author : Philippe Faist <philippe.faist@bluewin.ch>
> * URL             : http://klatexformula.sourceforge.net/
> * License         : GPL
>   Section         : tex
> It builds these binary package:
> klatexformula - GUI to easily get an image from a LaTeX formula or equation
> The upload would fix these bugs: 551335
> http://bitbucket.org/tobias.winchen/klatexformula_debian/downloads/
> The build system has changed upstream and now Lintian gives some warnings:
> W: klatexformula: non-dev-pkg-with-shlib-symlink
> usr/lib/libklfbackend.so.3.2 usr/lib/libklfbackend.so
> W: klatexformula: non-dev-pkg-with-shlib-symlink usr/lib/libklfapp.so.3.2
> usr/lib/libklfapp.so
> W: klatexformula: non-dev-pkg-with-shlib-symlink usr/lib/libklftools.so.3.2
> usr/lib/libklftools.so
> W: klatexformula: package-name-doesnt-match-sonames libklfapp3.2
> libklfbackend3.2 libklftools3.2
> As I understand it I could solve these by creating three library packages
> and accompaninging development packages. However, as klatexformula is a
> small program and I doubt that there is interest in the lib and -dev
> packages, can these simply be ignored (and overriden), or is it preferred
> to have the "full" set of lib and dev packages?

I fixed these bugs - the package builds now separate binary packages for the 
library and accompanying dev packages. Thanks to all for the answers. I am 
still looking for someone to sponsor this package.

Best regards,


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Reply to: