Thanks for your feedback. A couple of questions:
Jakub Wilk <email@example.com> writes:
> Please use more useful subjects next time. TIA.
> * Nikolaus Rath <Nikolaus@rath.org>, 2011-05-20, 15:37:
>>* URL : http://code.google.com/p/python-llfuse/
>>The package appears to be lintian clean.
> If you use --display-info, you'll get:
> I: python-llfuse source: duplicate-short-description python-llfuse
> I'm quite confident that lintian 2.5 complains about binary packages too
> (though I didn't build them yet).
> Where is the source for src/llfuse.c?
In src/llfuse.pyx and src/*.pxi. The latter were actually missing from
the tarball, thanks for the pointer.
> Please rebuild documentation and src/llfuse.c from sources (once we
> have it for the latter).
The documentation build requires an unreleased development version of
Sphinx. What's the proper way to handle this?
Is there some rationale for rebuilding documentation and llfuse.c when
building the package?
I (as upstream) am shipping llfuse.c in the release tarball, so that
there is no build dependency on Cython, and that I can be sure that the
generated file is actually working.
> You have both debian/pyversions and XS-Python-Version field. Please
> use either one or the other, not both.
Any suggestions which one to keep?
> Dependency on "python-distribute | python-setuptools" is a bit
> pointless, since python-distribute is a virtual package provided by
> python-setuptools. You could just write "python-distribute" or
> What is "Conflicts: s3ql (<= 0.28)" for?
Both of these are remnants from packaging for an Ubuntu PPA. I'll make
sure to remove them.
»Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a Banana.«
PGP fingerprint: 5B93 61F8 4EA2 E279 ABF6 02CF A9AD B7F8 AE4E 425C