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

Bug#484674: mldonkey: Packaging too complex



Hello,

On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 09:39:20AM -0400, Forest Bond wrote:
> Package: mldonkey
> Severity: normal
> 
> mldonkey packaging is way to complicated and bloated.  This is
> unnecessary and causes bugs.
>
>  * Why does mldonkey-server need an init script?  Yes, it's a daemon,
>    but that is merely an implementation detail.  When it comes down to
>    it, mldonkey is a *p2p client*.  It should be run by normal users
>    when they want to connect to a p2p network.
>

Because this is a daemon and debian require an init-script to run it.
 
>  * Why so many debconf questions?
> 

Because other users, not like you, ask for even more question.

>  * Why all of the Debian-specific utilities in debian/utils?  This is
>    just vanity.  Please, ship the upstream software, not your own.
> 

Debian-specific utils in debian/utils are specific to debian (as said in
you question). I don't see why upstream author should take care of
debian specific utils, since mldonkey is not debian specific (strange
answer in fact -- but strange question).

I answered your question with more data in another mail.

>  * Why the special make invocations?  The configure script suggests
>    running `make', but debian/rules runs `make utils opt' or some such
>    nonsense.  It fails when I try to build the version from intrepid on
>    my hardy box (after backporting and installing the dependencies),
>    even though just plain `make' runs perfectly.
> 

Because it works on Debian unstable, the primary target of this package.
We do not support Ubuntu (at least not directly). 

> All of these things make the package much more complicated than it
> should be.  Simply trying to backport the package is a process that
> takes several hours.
> 
> What is the justification for all of this complexity?
> 

Mldonkey is not a simple application. Packaging it, is not a simple
task. With time, we could simplify things. You seems to know what you
want, just propose patch to solve "this complexity" and maybe they will
be accepted (though is not up to me, since I don't have an active
participation in mldonkey packaging anymore). 

Regards
Sylvain Le Gall

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: