On Fri, Jul 21, 2006 at 05:14:11PM -0400, Eric Cooper wrote:
> The upstream author made his interface compatible with the stdlib's
> Digest module. My packaging now doesn't touch the upstream Caml
> source code at all.
Great news.
> I found it easier to use a completely different, shorter Makefile,
> based on OCamlMakefile. I put it in the debian/ subdirectory, and in
> debian/rules I just call "$(MAKE) -f debian/Makefile ..." Is this
> acceptable practice?
Sure, but if you really find it an useful improvement over upstream's
build system you can consider forwarding the suggestion of using
OCamlMakefile to the upstream author of the library. Always the same
principle: push Debian improvements upstream.
That said, the "close" line in your debian/changelog is better put side
by side the "initial packaging" entry since it closes an ITP. Having it
in another entry could make people wonder why and how you're closing
that (not described) bug. Since no upload has been done yet you can also
leave in the changelog a single entry "initial packaging" and remove the
mention of the 0.4 version.
Let me know when you feel ready for the first upload.
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -*- Computer Science PhD student @ Uny Bologna, Italy
zack@{cs.unibo.it,debian.org,bononia.it} -%- http://www.bononia.it/zack/
If there's any real truth it's that the entire multidimensional infinity
of the Universe is almost certainly being run by a bunch of maniacs. -!-
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature