Bug#769813: pre-approval: unblock: hdapsd/1:20141024-2
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
Hi,
the current version of hdapsd in testing (1:20141024-1) behaves differently
when installed on systemd-systems compared to sysvinit-systems: it is not
started automatically as the unit is shipped in "disabled" state.
Full blame on me for not properly checking my memory against the actual
package.
I would like to upload -2 to fix this. And if possible, update documentation
and debian/watch in the same upload. The relevant diff would be like this:
diff --git a/debian/README.Debian b/debian/README.Debian
index 97ea7cf..f914834 100644
--- a/debian/README.Debian
+++ b/debian/README.Debian
@@ -1,6 +1,16 @@
hdapsd for Debian
-----------------
+disable hdapsd
+==============
+
+hdapsd can be disabled on boot, if you want to start it manually.
+
+To disable hdapsd under systemd, use “systemctl disable hdapsd.service”.
+For inits using the init.d scripts, adjust /etc/default/hdapsd to have
+ START=no
+in it.
+
hdapsd with kernels <= 2.6.27
=============================
diff --git a/debian/rules b/debian/rules
index fdbeae1..a7c6726 100755
--- a/debian/rules
+++ b/debian/rules
@@ -14,10 +14,3 @@ override_dh_auto_install:
override_dh_auto_clean:
dh_auto_clean
rm -f $(CURDIR)/misc/*.service
-
-override_dh_systemd_enable:
- # Do not enable the file by default on purpose.
- # The user should enable it only after making sure the configuration is
- # appropriate for his/her computer.
- # This corresponds to START=no in /etc/default/hdapsd
- dh_systemd_enable --no-enable
diff --git a/debian/watch b/debian/watch
index a7f75b4..b9ae217 100644
--- a/debian/watch
+++ b/debian/watch
@@ -1,3 +1,2 @@
version=3
-opts="filenamemangle=s/(?:.*)?v?(\d[\d\.]*)\.tar\.gz/hdapsd-$1.tar.gz/" \
- https://github.com/evgeni/hdapsd/tags (?:.*/)?v?(\d[\d\.]*)\.tar\.gz
+https://github.com/evgeni/hdapsd/releases .*/download/.*/hdapsd-(\d[\d\.]*)\.tar\.gz
Does this sound reasonable for you?
Greets
Evgeni
Reply to: