Re: Re: RFS: quickrdp

[Tobias Eliasson <arnestig@gmail.com>]

On 2012-01-15 16:49, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> The comment at the top of d/rules doesn't make sense. Please remove it.
> debian/docs is empty. Just remove it.
> Why "Priority: extra"?
>    
> The upstream makefile hides compilation commands. Please patch it not to do that.
> The program is built without debugging information. This is violation of a "should" policy (§10.1).
> The program is built with -O3 optimization even when DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=noopt is used.
> You recommend tsclient, but this package has been removed form unstable (see bug #547314).
> Does anybody uses telnet these days? I think recommending it is overkill, maybe Suggests would be more appropriate.
> What is perl-base recommendation for? Essential packages in Recommends looks a bit suspicious.
> Lintian complains:
> W: quickrdp source: out-of-date-standards-version 3.8.4 (current is 3.9.2)
> E: quickrdp: helper-templates-in-copyright
> I: quickrdp: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/quickrdp.1.gz:46
> I: quickrdp: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/quickrdp.1.gz:50
> There are some warnings from dpkg-shlibdeps:
> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: dependency on libwx_gtk2u_aui-2.8.so.0 could be avoided if "debian/quickrdp/usr/bin/quickrdp" were not uselessly linked against it (they use none of its symbols).
> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: dependency on libwx_gtk2u_richtext-2.8.so.0 could be avoided if "debian/quickrdp/usr/bin/quickrdp" were not uselessly linked against it (they use none of its symbols).
> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: dependency on libwx_gtk2u_html-2.8.so.0 could be avoided if "debian/quickrdp/usr/bin/quickrdp" were not uselessly linked against it (they use none of its symbols).
> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: dependency on libwx_baseu_xml-2.8.so.0 could be avoided if "debian/quickrdp/usr/bin/quickrdp" were not uselessly linked against it (they use none of its symbols).
> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: dependency on libwx_gtk2u_qa-2.8.so.0 could be avoided if "debian/quickrdp/usr/bin/quickrdp" were not uselessly linked against it (they use none of its symbols).
> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: dependency on libwx_gtk2u_xrc-2.8.so.0 could be avoided if "debian/quickrdp/usr/bin/quickrdp" were not uselessly linked against it (they use none of its symbols).
> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: dependency on libwx_baseu_net-2.8.so.0 could be avoided if "debian/quickrdp/usr/bin/quickrdp" were not uselessly linked against it (they use none of its symbols).
> --
> Jakub Wilk
>    

Thank you for your comments.
Removing unwanted files and improperly use of stripping symbols, compile 
output and optimization is no problem fixing.

I use priority Extra since I thought that was what was used for all 
non-standard programs. Seeing that other packages seems to use optional, 
I see no problem switching it over to that.

Tsclient is not a requirement for QuickRDP 1.1, but launching RDP 
connections won't work without it. If tsclient is being removed in a 
near future I guess QuickRDP has to rely on rdesktop or another RDP 
frontend in a near future release. Will this affect this package however?

Yes, unfortunately a lot of people are still stuck with devices and 
hosts that only allow telnet :(.
And since telnet package is 'Priority: standard', I don't see any reason 
not to change Recommends to Suggest.
Same goes for perl-base, but that's just for perl script support in 
QuickRDP. I guess Suggests will work here aswell.

I don't understand why Lintian complains on 
helper-template-in-copyright. I can't see that it's actually a template 
anymore. Sure I used dh_make to create the template, but I've changed 
all parts I should as far as I understand... (obviously not though).
And why out-of-date-standards-version is 3.8.4 instead of 3.9.2 I have 
no idea. Could it be because the package was created on a Squeeze system 
and not Wheezy?

How would I proceed here? I have obviously changes to make and I am 
upstream author. Since this ITP and RFS a new release of QuickRDP has 
been launched with new bugfixes that goes under version name 1.1.1. 
Since there already is a ITP bug filed should I just upload a new 
package to mentors.debian.org with the new version name even if 
ITP#655156 states that 1.1 is the package in focus?

As to the wxWidgets linking warning comes from using $(wx-config --libs) 
to extract what libraries are available and active on your system. I 
don't think this is a problem either but I could have a look at how 
other programs get packaged that also uses wxWidgets.

Thank you for your time,
Tobias