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

Re: guitarix-0.46.0 released

Hi Dennis

Most (all) of the warnings could safely been overwritten as the marked sources that wont be used to build guitarix. So, the warnings for 

 guitarix source: uses-python-distutils

point all (except specmatch/setup.py) to developer tools we used to develop the source code, but not for build guitarix. They been there mostly for documentation and un-used in this context.

the one for specmatch/setup.py is un-related because it's not (and should not be) part of the guitarix binary package, so un-used here.

maintainer-manual-page

I guess that's from our old included debian folder, which you didn't use at all.

package-does-not-install-examples

those point to NAM and RTNeural examples which comes with the submodules. We don't build nor install those examples on purpose. We only build the core libraries and link them statically in.

source-contains-autogenerated-gperf-data

some users have had issues to generate the methods file (missing gperf, . . ), it will be re-generated on build when possible, so it's here as fallback file only.

source-contains-prebuilt-_javascript_-object

Those files been only used for build the webui front-end, which isn't (and should not be) part of the debian package, so un-used here.

So we left with

pkg-config-unavailable-for-cross-compilation

I don't really know what that means. the related .pc files will be generated during build from the .pc.in files
Don't know why lintian tells they are not available for cross compilation, as that is exactly the reason why we generate then during build.

Hope that helps to clear the output.

regards
hermann

Am 22.03.24 um 20:47 schrieb Dennis Braun:
Heya!

thanks a lot Hermann, and sorry for my late reply!
Well yeah there are a few lintian warnings/errors left, like

uses-python-distutils ...
source-contains-autogenerated-gperf-data ...
and source-contains-prebuilt-_javascript_-object ...

The current lintian output: https://salsa.debian.org/multimedia-team/guitarix/-/jobs/5442208

i still don't know how to fix them or if some of them should be ignored/overridden... I would be happy if somebody can help me with that 🙂

And yes, there are some major transitions happening on which Guitarix relies.

Best regards,
Dennis

Am 20.03.24 um 19:58 schrieb Nicholas D Steeves:
Hello Hermann,

Reply follows inline:

Hermann Meyer <brummer-@web.de> writes:

Hi Nicholas

Thanks for your reply.

Well, my massage was just a notice.

Simply because there wasn't any release of guitarix within the last two
years.

Oh!

But now I've added some new features and make a new release and switch
from Sourceforge to Github, so I guessed I should message about it here.

Thank you, I see what you mean, and yes that makes sense.  My concern
was/is for any of the potentially overlapping cases: "neglected
package", "maintainer doesn't follow the mailing list", "maintainer
updates on a once-a stable release schedule", "maintainer only updates
when a new upstream version bug is filed", "no one noticed your message
to the group list", etc.

I've seen that Dennis Braun have update the VCS version already but
there seems to be some blocking transitions ongoing or some test fail, I
don't know.

I confirm the new Guitarix package builds for me, so yes, you're right,
it seems that Denis Braun is waiting for the "64-bit time_t transition"
(or an auto-transition) to complete.

As a long time debian user I happily work together with the debian
developers when it comes to issues with some of my upstream projects.

Thank you!

Kind regards,
Nicholas

Reply to: