Bug#813933: RFS: sawfish/1:1.11-1 [ITA] -- window manager for X11
On 8 February 2016 21:57:11 GMT+00:00, Mattia Rizzolo <mattia@debian.org> wrote:
>On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 09:29:55PM +0000, Jose M Calhariz wrote:
>> Today I didn't review all yours remarks. But in the spirit of
>release
>> early and release often here goes my today effort.
>
>yay, I definitely approve this ;)
>I hadn't gone deeper, just commented on your last changes here.
>
>> On 07/02/16 22:01, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
>> > On Sun, Feb 07, 2016 at 08:40:10PM +0000, Jose M Calhariz wrote:
>> >> On 06/02/16 23:41, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
>> >>> Umh, couldn't you turn d/rules to use the dh sequencer?
>> >> I don't know enough and lintian show many problems with upstream
>d/rules.
>> > well, let's fix them, then :)
>> > Attached there is a d/rules using short dh, may you try it and bend
>it
>> > better to the needs of this package?
>>
>> I managed to make it compile, but for a reason I don't know I needed
>to
>> add the following lines:
>>
>> override_dh_auto_configure:
>> cp /usr/share/misc/config.guess .
>> cp /usr/share/misc/config.sub .
>> dh_auto_configure --parallel
>
>that's so weird.
>
>even more in light of the new dh_update_autotools_config which is run
>automatically by dh >= 9.20160114 and do exactly that.
>Are you testing your package in an update sid chroot?
I am using cowbuilder and I have read the docs. Some mistake from my side certainly.
>
>> I have tried many ideas but was only this way that it build
>
>also, it did build here without them.
>
>> >>> * d/copyright: consider write a copyright-format 1.0 one? at a
>first
>> >>> sight doesn't look too much work.
>> >> Done
>> > though it's not compliant, and indeed lintian is noisy on it,
>please try
>> > to figure out what's wrong with it and fix it.
>> > I believe blindly following lintian here is enough, though it would
>be
>> > nice if you could understand what's the problem by yourself :)
>>
>> I fix it, but I don't understand why :-)
>
>ok, I'm going to assume you read all of
>https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/ and
>somehow did not understand it.
>
>DEP-5 copyright is RFC 822-compliant file where there are basically 3
>types of paragraphs:
> * the header paragraph => you know it
> * the file paragraphs
> * the stand alone license paragraphs
>
>the file paragraph is composed by at least
> * Files:
> * Copyright:
> * License:
>
>in your earlier attempt at it you put a blank line between Copyright
>and
>License, and de-facto created a separated pargraph, totally
>disconnected
>from the previous one. That one by itself was a compliant stand alone
>license paragraph, but
> 1) it was repeated by another one later
> 2) it was not refereced by a License: line from a file paragraph.
>
>
>I hope I made the thing at least clearer.
>
>> >>> * please try to get a reproducible buildable package, from what I
>see it
>> >>> wouldn't be difficult at all.
>
>♥ THANK YOU! :D
>
>> >>> there are 57 open bugs, are you telling me none of them get
>closed by
>> >>> this upload? :\
>
>ok, I saw you added some closes: to the bug, and added a line to the
>changelog saying that you closed those bugs. meh.
>you should explicitly list what you are closing, briefly; probably the
>best way is in a indented list, something like
> * New upstream version.
> + Fix blabla due to fofo. Closes: #xxxxx
> + Fix ciaciaaicegow. Closes: #yyyyy
>And adding to the changelog a sentence like "I closed bugs" is totally
>useless, just remove it :)
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Reply to: