Re: RFS: gtkpod (updated package)
On 09/05/2011 12:12, Etienne Millon wrote:
> On Mon, May 09, 2011 at 11:17:38AM +0200, Matteo F. Vescovi wrote:
>>> - debian/rules :
>>> - why do you remove RPATHs from executables and binary ? It's stated briefly
>>> in NEWS.debian, but the reason is not there.
>> Without this hack, it doesn't compile and build. I'll add a line about
>> it in NEWS.Debian (or README.Debian?).
> Eventually README.Debian as it does not concern end-users.
>>> - as libgtkpod.la is new, no reverse dependencies should depend on its
>>> existence. It should be safe not to install it.
>> OK, gonna remove it. However I asked in IRC channel and they told me how
>> to blank the dependency_libs field and keep the rest of the file, for
> Actually there is no need to be compatible as nothing depends on it
> ATM :)
>>> - the "README.debian" is not necessary.
>> Really? OK.
> I mean the line in debian/changelog : it adds nothing because relevant
> information is already in README.debian.
I initially misread... and understood the meaning once I've opened the
changelog ;-) Now I remember that I added that line because in former
package there wasn't that file while I thought it could be important
adding my changes there... and that was a way to let people know I also
created it. Issue resolved. Thanks.
Now I've updated almost all the steps you had an observation on.
Thanks a lot for your review. It has been really helpful.
Hope to find a sponsor, sooner or later ;-)
Ing. Matteo F. Vescovi
Il messaggio e' stato analizzato alla ricerca di virus o
contenuti pericolosi da MailScanner, ed e'
risultato non infetto.