Re: RFR: webalizer - web server log analysis program
On 01/14/2011 05:53 AM, Julien Viard de Galbert wrote:
> Dear mentors and mentees,
>
> I am looking for reviews for my package "webalizer"
>
> The previous maintainer Felipe Augusto van de Wiel (faw) agreed that
> I take over the package, also as he his really busy and this package
> will be targeting experimental (due to the freeze) I'd like the package
> to be really polished before asking him for sponsorship.
>
> My packaging work is currently on collab-maint:
> http://git.debian.org/?p=collab-maint/webalizer.git;a=summary
>
> I already got the help of Pim van den Berg on the logio patch.
> So more attention is needed on other patches especially the TTF patch
> and the gettext patches.
>
> Any comment on general packaging are also appreciated.
>
> Thanks for your time.
>
>
Hi,
First of all, thanks for your interest in Webalizer. I'm a heavy user
of it, and it's nice that you seem to want to take over the maintenance
of this left-over. Let me give few comments...
>From your changelog:
* New maintainer.
If you are adopting the package, then you should close a bug for it
(the package should be orphaned, then the bug should be renamed as
"ITA" (Intention To Adopt), then you should close it in your changelog).
I tried to do:
git checkout -b upstream-sid origin/upstream-sid
but it doesn't seem you are using branches. Or am I mistaking with
names of the branches you used? Where did you store the .orig.tar.gz?
I had to pickup the tgz from upstream, that's not good.
Upstream uses 2.23-03 as version name, it seems you renamed it 2.23.03.
Why did you do that? If the "-" char is used for Debian, and it's a good
thing to have upstream avoiding it (I would strongly recommend you to
get it touch with Webalizer authors and let them change that), you can
still use it for your package versionning, and produce a 2.23-03-1 in
Debian. It's better than renaming it at least, IMHO.
Then, I tried to build your package and it fails:
dh_autoreconf
/usr/share/aclocal/dotconf.m4:5: warning: underquoted definition of
AM_PATH_DOTCONF
/usr/share/aclocal/dotconf.m4:5: run info '(automake)Extending aclocal'
/usr/share/aclocal/dotconf.m4:5: or see
http://sources.redhat.com/automake/automake.html#Extending-aclocal
configure.in:37: warning: AC_TRY_RUN called without default to allow
cross compiling
autoconf: Undefined macros:
configure.in:322:AC_MSG_NOTICE(Done. Type 'make' to continue with build.)
configure.in:36:AC_SYS_LARGEFILE
configure.in:39:AC_CHECK_DECL(altzone,OPTS="-DHAVE_ALTZONE
${OPTS}",,[#include <time.h>])
configure.in:37: warning: AC_TRY_RUN called without default to allow
cross compiling
autoconf: Undefined macros:
configure.in:327:AC_MSG_NOTICE(Done. Type 'make' to continue with build.)
configure.in:36:AC_SYS_LARGEFILE
configure.in:39:AC_CHECK_DECL(altzone,OPTS="-DHAVE_ALTZONE
${OPTS}",,[#include <time.h>])
configure.in:37: warning: AC_TRY_RUN called without default to allow
cross compiling
autoconf: Undefined macros:
configure.in:300:AC_MSG_NOTICE(Done. Type 'make' to continue with build.)
configure.in:36:AC_SYS_LARGEFILE
configure.in:39:AC_CHECK_DECL(altzone,OPTS="-DHAVE_ALTZONE
${OPTS}",,[#include <time.h>])
dh_autoreconf: autoreconf -f -i returned exit code 1
make: *** [build] Error 9
dpkg-buildpackage: error: debian/rules build gave error exit status 2
IMHO, the old format 1.0 was fine, and unless you really know what
you are doing, and do it well, keep it. :)
Let me know when you have fixed the above issue, and I'll look further.
Thomas
Reply to: