Re: Packaging Open Porous Media (OPM) software suite
Hi Markus,
On 2021-04-28 16:17, Markus Blatt wrote:
> I have recently posted an ITP (bug )for this software
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=987381
Thanks a lot an interesting ITP, and welcome to the team!
Just a couple of comments on points not addressed by Anton:
> - For the library packages the SONAME will change with each release, as
> the ABI is quite unstable. The version is not part of the library
> package name, which lintian would warn about. But we are overwriting
> the warning currently.
This lintian warning is quite important. If the ABI is unstable, I would
suggest making these libraries private by putting them under
/usr/lib/<triplet>/opm (for example) and shipping them in the same
binary package as the main executable(s).
> - Does the top-level directory in the tarballs need to have a special
> name (like opm-common-2021.04 for version 2021.04 of opm-common)?
> The reason for asking is that upstream tags final versions as
> release/<version>/final, which will make uuscan us funny looking
> opm-common-release-2021.04-final. If it does upstream needs to use the
> more common tagging scheme v<version>, or we need to create the
> tarballs ourselves and use gbp import-orig <tarball>.
The suffix '-final' can be removed by uscan's option 'uversionmangle'.
Best,
Andrius
Reply to: