Re: gengetopt - Is this a +dfsg case?
On 22 February 2014 12:42, Bart Martens <bartm@debian.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 11:58:39AM +0100, Dariusz Dwornikowski wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am maintaining a great package - zmap. It depends, for building
>> only, on gengetopt [1] to generate main.c stub for command line
>> arguments handling. However gengetopt was removed from testing due to
>> [2], it is only in unstable for now. This blocks new zmap versions
>> going to testing. I already contacted the maintainer some time ago
>> asking whether it would be fixed or he needs some help but he has not
>> responded yet.
>> [1] http://packages.qa.debian.org/g/gengetopt.html
>> [2] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=708880
>>
>> My question is, how this situation should be handled, should these
>> manuals be removed and package uploaded as dfsg ?
>
> I suggest to add a well-tested patch to the bug, and tag the bug "patch".
Sorry, quite new to this. Patch what ? A source package, an orig
tarball ? Along with the debian/ directory ? Should the patch remove
the files and change the changelog to add dfsg tag ?
>
>> Or the best is to wait for upstream to change the licence.
>
> Waiting is usually not the best approach.
Heh ok.
>
>>
>> I am asking out of curiosity, and to know how to handle such
>> situations in the future, I do not want hijack the package from
>> Alessio.
>
> How to handle such situations in the future depends on the situations. :-) In
> this case I suggest ... see above.
>
> Regards,
>
> Bart Martens
--
Pozdrawiam,
Dariusz Dwornikowski, Assistant
Institute of Computing Science, Poznań University of Technology
www.cs.put.poznan.pl/ddwornikowski/
room 2.7.2 BTiCW | tel. +48 61 665 29 41
Reply to: