[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#673600: RFS: nyancat/1.0+git20120519.5fe3de9-1



[I've uploaded a new version 1.0+git20120523.99dc310-1 [1] to
mentors.d.o]

On 25/05/12 11:34, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> I'd rather not add the override, but ignore the tag for the time being.
> hardening-no-stackprotector will be disabled in the next lintian release.

I've removed this override.
 
> You also removed postrm; please document that.

Documented.
 
> The postinst didn't work for me. I ended up with:
> 
> $ grep nyancat /etc/inetd.conf
> #<off># telnet          stream  tcp     nowait  nobody 
> /usr/bin/nyancat        nyancat -t
> telnet stream tcp6 nowait nobody /usr/bin/nyancat-server nyancat -t
> telnet stream tcp nowait nobody /usr/bin/nyancat-server nyancat -t

As discussed offlist, this is due to the fact that reconf-inetd was
installed during my installation tests, but you were pulling in
reconf-inetd with nyancat-server. I've fixed this now by adding
if [ "$2" = "0.1+git20120401.5a88b86-1" ]; to the postinst instead.

> What is "exit 0" in postinst for? It doesn't hurt, but it strikes me as
> odd.

I'm not quite where that came from myself. I've Removed it anyway.

> I think it would make sense if nyancat-server had a strict versioned (=
> ${binary:Version}) dependency on nyancat.

You can't have a strict binary dependency from an arch all package.
I've added (>= ${source:Version}) instead.

Jon

[1]
nyancat (1.0+git20120523.99dc310-1) unstable; urgency=low

  * New upstream snapshot
    - Fixes buildflags being incorrectly passed
    - Pushed nyancat manpage upstream; Removed Debian copy
  * Switch to debhelper v9
  * Use reconf-inetd to provide nyancat-server configs
    - Provide nyancat-server as symlink to nyancat
    - Add versioned dependency on nyancat
    - Remove now redundant nyancat-server manpage and postrm
    - Update package description to reflect this
    - Update postinst to aid transition to reconf-inetd
    - Add IPv6 support

 -- Jonathan McCrohan <jmccrohan@gmail.com>  Fri, 25 May 2012 01:04:10 +0100



Reply to: