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

Re: Bug#806572: RFS: multimail/0.50~20150922-1 [ITA]

On Tuesday, January 05, 2016 04:27:48 AM Tobias Frost wrote:
> Am Montag, den 04.01.2016, 21:29 -0500 schrieb Robert James Clay:
> Some small review. ....


> - Please do not introduce a dbg package -- they are now automatically
> generated.  ....

    That came out since my multimail package on mentors was put online at the mentors site.   The package doesn't have any reverse depends; so no, it doesn't really need an explicit "-dbg" package anymore.

> - Is the patch forwarded to upstream?

   The non vendor specific parts of it, you mean?  I plan to further discuss other aspects of it with him, yes...  I have provided him with the results of package builds but he hasn't commented...

> - Please B-D on debhelper >=9 not debhelper >=9.0
> (The versioned depends could even go, as debhelper 9 is already in since oldstable)

   I take your point about its setting, but I think I'd rather keep it explicitly noted...

> - d/rules: Are the lines setting CPPFLAGS and friend really needed?

   As I recall, those were needed to clean up the hardening related lintian errors.

> - also, with the drop of the dbg package some overrides can be removed

   "overrides"?  You mean, in d/rules?

> - please remove the comments from d/watch

  I sometimes have relevant info in d/watch file comments, but yes in this case there's really no need for them...

RJ Clay

Reply to: