Bug#972073: RFS: cool-retro-term/1.1.1+git20200723-1 [RC] -- terminal emulator which mimics old screens
On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 07:46:34AM +0200, Gürkan Myczko wrote:
> Hi Tobias
>
> The BTS will probably not get a copy as it was closed, i'd need to bts
> reopen 972073 (and unarchive when it was archived),
> but I'll skip that for now.
>
> On 13.10.2020 21:26, Tobias Frost wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 09:44:17AM +0200, Gürkan Myczko wrote:
> > >
> > > * Package name : cool-retro-term
> > > Version : 1.1.1+git20200723-1
> > > Upstream Author : Filippo Scognamiglio <flscogna@gmail.com>
> > > * URL : https://github.com/Swordfish90/cool-retro-term
> > > * License : GPL-3, MIT, OFL-1.1, dfsg-compliant-text,
> > > BSD-3-clause
> > > * Vcs :
> > > https://salsa.debian.org/myczko-guest/cool-retro-term
> > > Section : x11
> >
> > Uploaded, but a question:
> >
> > README.source says it is repackaged, due to dfsg topics. However, I'm
> > missing the dfsg suffix and also a Files-Excluded section in
> > d/copyright.
> > How is the repacking done?
>
> The qmltermwidget part is +ds, and the fonts +dfsg, sorry I completely
> forgot
> to add +dfsg, will do so with the next update. (I had forgotten to reflect
> the
> repackaging with +dfsg/+ds for a long time, but recently re-added it to
> later
> sponsored uploads). And I'm aware of Files-Excluded section as well, have it
> at some places, will need to add for all others where README.source
> documents
> removals)
>
> > Other nitpicks:
> >
> > (Though, it is strange that dh_missing fails on you; not sure how
> > dh_missing
> > can cause a file to be overwritten.)
>
> Very strange indeed, I did not investigate, just override it for now, to get
> rid of the RC bug.
>
> > Something for subsequent uploads (not checked if legit)
> > X: fonts-hermit: package-contains-no-arch-dependent-files
> > X: fonts-proggy: package-contains-no-arch-dependent-files
> > X: fonts-terminus: package-contains-no-arch-dependent-files
>
> Having seen that of course I tried to change it to Arch: all, however that
> would fail with:
> http://phd-sid.ethz.ch/debian/cool-retro-term/2323/cool-retro-term_1.1.1%2Bgit20200723-1_amd64.build
>
> Even more strange, if you have a tip/pointer/hint/idea, I'd be glad to get
> rid of those.
This seems -- from a quick look -- related to the dh_missing problem:
They look _very_ similar.
POSSIBLY a build system issue; maybe it does not like parallel?
(A quick test built here with forcing dh to non-parallel builds,
but fails later dh_missing complaining about not installed files.
This dh_install smells a bit like that there are hidden bugs in the packageing.)
> > P: cool-retro-term source: maintainer-manual-page
> > debian/cool-retro-term.1
> > manpage forwarded?
>
> Good point, let me check:
> Well, no, yes, upstream hasn't done a release for some time, and he ships
> his own packaging/debian directory
> with a manpage there, which is slightly different. I will need to think
> about what to do here. I believe his
> is better, but will need to compare/diff and update accordingly. Something
> for a future/next upload.
upstream should change that location of the manpage, I guess.
(Or drop the debian directory altogether.)
Point them to the upstream guide at https://wiki.debian.org/UpstreamGuide :)
> > the patches need dep3 headers.
>
> Ok two small patches of me, I can fill the dep3 headers I guess, also with
> next upload.
>
> >
> > override_dh_auto_configure is a NOP.
>
> ACK, to be fixed with next upload.
>
> >
> > Cheers,
> > --
> > tobi
>
Reply to: