On Thu, Dec 09, 2010 at 08:07:30PM -0500, Jean Schurger wrote:
> Le jeudi 09 décembre 2010 à 08:59 +0100, Etienne Millon a écrit :
> > On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 05:39:25PM -0500, Jean Schurger wrote:
> > > What's the 'good' way to ask to review an update of a package like this
> > > one ? I should continue to dput it as replacement, and ask in that
> > > thread ?
> >
> > "dput -f mentors" it will overwrite the previous package. You can
> > state that you updated it in this thread and it will probably be fine.
>
>
> Hi, i've updated my free42 package.
>
> The package can be found on mentors.debian.net:
> - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/f/free42
> - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable
> main contrib non-free
> - dget
> http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/f/free42/free42_1.4.66-1.dsc
>
> Can you have a look ?
>
> Jean.
Hello,
Package builds cleanly and is lintian clean. That's good news :)
- dpkg_shlibdeps does not complain anymore. It means that your patch
works. However, you have included two patches, and one
(0_less_libs.diff) does not apply (probably because your output
directory was named "2"). The second one is fine, though. You can
delete the non-working one and remove it from
debian/patches/series.
- you use a lot of calls to "pwd" in debian/rules. This is not
necessary, relative paths work too : `pwd`/x is equivalent to x.
Moreover, debhelper can help a lot here (dh $@).
- Your manpages should describe how the binary is run. Does it have
command-line options ? etc. That will be the first thing your
users will try if they don't get how the package work. Other
documentation should go… in the documentation :-) .
- Probably an upstream issue, but I find it confusing to ship two
binaries that differ only in the way they interpret numbers. IMHO
that should be a command-line switch or a menu option.
Cheers
--
Etienne Millon
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature