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

Bug#826134: marked as done (RFS: libvpd/2.2.5-1 ITP: libvpd -- VPD Database access library)

Your message dated Thu, 9 Jun 2016 06:20:52 +0000 (UTC)
with message-id <762119202.14969.1465453252783.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>
and subject line Re: Bug#826134: RFS: libvpd/2.2.5-1 ITP: libvpd -- VPD Database access library
has caused the Debian Bug report #826134,
regarding RFS: libvpd/2.2.5-1 ITP: libvpd -- VPD Database access library
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
826134: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=826134
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 

Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for my package "libvpd"

 Package name    : libvpd
 Version         : 2.2.5-1
 Upstream Author : Vasant Hegde <hegdevasant@in.ibm.com>
 URL             : http://sourceforge.net/projects/linux-diag/files/libservicelog/
 License         : LGPL-2+
 Section         : libs

It builds those binary packages:

  libvpd-2.2-2 - VPD Database access library
  libvpd-dev - VPD Database access library development files

To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL:

https://mentors.debian.net/package/libvpd


Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:

  dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/libv/libvpd/libvpd_2.2.5-1.dsc

More information about libservicelog can be obtained from http://sourceforge.net/projects/linux-diag/files/libservicelog/

Note:
  This is for Power architectures.
  I initially packaged this for Ubuntu Trusty. I pulled it from Ubuntu did a few
  changes and here it is. It would need to be synced with Ubuntu.


Regards,
 Frederic Bonnard

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
Hi,


>For usr/include/libvpd-2/* -> usr/include

>I initially used that "generic" regexps but I wondered and prefered more
>targetted regexps to avoid copying files that were wrongly installed in that
>path, in case of a later upstream version.
>Meaning that the idea was that I see things failing and fix it, or extend the regexp
>if that's correct, but don't put things blindly in that path.
>However, I used usr/include in the packaging.


well, I prefer you to double checking at each upstream release for installed files (dpkg -c IIRC), because otherwise
you might not notice new headers not installed because of a too strict regex.

I prefer an RC bug because of a bad header, rather than people failing to build with your library
because of a missing one

>right, I didn't see there was also a dh_installbla for udev at that time :)


:)

>As a special exception to the GNU General Public License, if you
>distribute this file as part of a program that contains a
>configuration script generated by Autoconf, you may include it under
>the same distribution terms that you use for the rest of that program.
>---
>Does that mean that it could be distributed with the global license of the
>project? And maybe needn't being explictly listed in d/copyright ?
>Anyway, I added those files as well as config.guess, config.sub, aclocal.m4,
>Makefile.in and configure with their specific Copyright and License, just in
>case.


I like to be explicit, but you are right, you can relicense them

>done
>Indeed, I missed something here.


the licenses is probably too short, but I sponsored the package, lets see what
ftpmasters have to say :)
(it is a common license, but last time they were asking a short description anyway
and your one seems to be too short! please search on codesearch.debian.net for other examples)
>For the last 2, I think lintian gets lost with .so that are differently named :
>lrwxrwxrwx root/root         0 2016-06-06 15:44 ./usr/lib/powerpc64le-linux-gnu/libvpd.so -> libvpd-2.2.so.2.2.5
>lrwxrwxrwx root/root         0 2016-06-06 15:44 ./usr/lib/powerpc64le-linux-gnu/libvpd_cxx.so -> libvpd_cxx-2.2.so.2.2.5


probably correct.



thanks for your contribution to Debian!

Gianfranco

--- End Message ---
Reply to: