Hi Jörg, Ping. Any progress on xmlrpc-c? On 10-01-15 21:35, Paul Gevers wrote: > On 10-01-15 20:59, Paul Gevers wrote: >>>> I think you don't need to add the version to the dpkg-gensymbols call, >>>> and if you do, why strip the Debian part of the version? Doesn't >>>> dh_makeshlibs call dpkg-gensymbols itself? So if you try to override >>>> anything, shouldn't the dpkg-gensymbols calls be BEFORE the >>>> dh_makeshlibs call? This doesn't look right to me. Have you seen >>>> https://wiki.debian.org/UsingSymbolsFiles where it describes a way to >>>> create a symbols file that contains as much history as possible? > > I disabled the calls to dpkg-gensymbols in your d/rules file and I > manually removed the symbols for 1.39.2 for libxmlrpc-c++8 that you > already added and I find that the symbols files are created. Indeed, > lintian complains, but that is fixed by generating the symbols files > before the build such that you can also build on it later. Yes, you can > then strip them with -v (as you have them now in the package). Really, > no need for the override of dh_makeshlibs AFAICT. The reason why I > wouldn't want to have this in the rules is the risk of being forgetting > to update the symbols file the next time it needs to be updated. In the > end that would lead to to strict requirements on the version. I saw you made some changes after the last e-mail, but you didn't comment on it or my other e-mail (and I like to see your comments before I decide what to think of the current state). > Oh, and by the way, your get-orig-source target is broken. If I run it > now, the $DATE string does not match the date in the changelog. Paul
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature