On 2017-08-03, David Bremner wrote: > The .el files are in the binary package, but I guess the postinst > doesn't follow debian emacs policy to get the files byte compiled and > installed in the right place. In the QA upload I just did, I thought about weather to fix this by converting to dh-elpa based on the lintian warning: https://lintian.debian.org/tags/emacsen-common-without-dh-elpa.html "Please consider transitioning the package build to use dh-elpa, unless the package is required to work with XEmacs." But it wasn't clear to me, a humble QA uploader barely familiar with emacs, XEmacs, and .el files at all, weather it is required to work with XEmacs or how I would figure that out. The lintian warning I saw helpfully provided a link (that I managed to ignore until just a few moments ago) to: https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/DebianEmacsenTeam/elpa-hello But that seems geared towards a package actually shipping a package just for elpa, as opposed to a package that happens to ship a stray, lonely .el file. And with a very brief and casual search, none of the above linked to a Debian Emacs Policy, though if I spent even more time looking for it, maybe I would find it helpful... oh look, the emacsen-common package ships /usr/share/doc/emacsen-common/debian-emacs-policy.gz ... that is probably it. Well, if anyone more courageous than me wants to take a stab at making a2ps comply with debian-emacs-policy, maybe my meandering response will help you find your way to a patch and/or upload. live well, vagrant
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature