Re: Committing to a team-maintained package repository
Hi Andreas, thanks a lot for reviewing my changes.
Andreas Tille wrote on 14/07/2018:
> Hi Paride,
>
> On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 03:18:08PM +0200, Paride Legovini wrote:
>>> just go for it push and sak for sponsoring here.
>>
>> I would be glad if you could review my commits here:
>>
>> https://salsa.debian.org/science-team/libmseed
>
> So just let me know if you want to
>
> 1. Add yourself as Uploaders
I'm glad to follow your suggestion here.
> 2. Switch to d-shlibs
I didn't know it and it is indeed a nice tool, so thanks for the
pointer. But: it seems to me that the really interesting feature is the
installation of the .so/.a/.la files and related links in the right
places. The destination path for the include files and documentation
still has to be specified manually, so I think there is no real
advantage over dh_install or dh_installdocs (which gained some nice
features in compat 11). For this reasons, I'm using d-shlibs only to
install the shared object. I'm not yet completely sure on how I like it:
the toolchain is already complex, do we want to add another tool to it?
I would probably like to see it become a debhelper first class citizen
(as e.g. dh_installshlibs).
Please check the relevant commit for libmseed. If you think I somehow
missed the point with this tool don't hesitate to let me know. Comments
are always welcome.
> Whatever you decide I'll also sponsor in the current state.
I think the package is ready, I will let you s/UNRELEASED/unstable/ and
tag the release. I'd be happy to do it myself, but you would need to
grant me DM upload rights for this package. There is no hurry for this:
do as you prefer.
I pushed the upstream/2.19.5 tag, which was missing.
One last question. Do we actually need these lines:
include /usr/share/dpkg/architecture.mk
ifeq ($(origin CC),default)
CC := $(DEB_HOST_GNU_TYPE)-gcc
endif
in d/rules? They are suggested here:
https://wiki.debian.org/CrossBuildPackagingGuidelines
Are they still relevant with Multi-Arch?
Cheers,
Paride
Reply to: