intetsim review (Re: ITP: inetsim)
- Subject: intetsim review (Re: ITP: inetsim)
- From: lukas@schwaighofer.name (Lukas Schwaighofer)
- Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2017 23:43:48 +0200
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20171016234348.6fa0928f@localhost>
- In-reply-to: <MWHPR04MB11194760C1AFF88D89819344C5740@MWHPR04MB1119.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
- References: <MWHPR04MB11194760C1AFF88D89819344C5740@MWHPR04MB1119.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Hi GenYu,
On Mon, 9 Oct 2017 03:04:37 +0000
yoo z <zouyoo at outlook.com> wrote:
> I created two fake .exe files under the debian/samples, these files
> are just txt files and i put a README.Debian with them.
Good, sorry for the delay. As I already told you privately, I had a
quite busy week. Anyways, here we go:
* Please always check the package using lintian before requesting a
review. For the version of inetsim currently in your git repository
it reports:
- W: inetsim: script-in-etc-init.d-not-registered-via-update-rc.d
etc/init.d/inetsim
- E: inetsim: init.d-script-needs-depends-on-lsb-base
etc/init.d/inetsim (line 31)
- I: inetsim: init.d-script-does-not-implement-optional-option
etc/init.d/inetsim status
Since policy recommends implementing the status option [1], it's a
good idea to do so it. Copy the init script to debian/inetsim.init
and then modify it to support the status option. This will also
automatically fix the first of the reported issue (since it is then
installed by dh_installinit).
? This also means you no longer need dh-exec, more cleanup :)
* debian/control: Now that you are a pkg-security member, please move
the repository to alioth as documented our wiki and add the
correct/add the Vcs-{Git,Browser} control fields.
* debian/rules: There is no need to remove the two executable files,
they are not installed anyways since you removed the corresponding
lines from debian/inetsim.install. You can remove everything after
the `dh $@` line.
Unfortunately the situation with the two .exe files is even a bit
messier. I just asked on #debian-mentors in irc whether we have to
remove them from the source package as well. The result of the short
conversation was that a repack is preferred, because there is no easy
way to prove that these executables were actually compiled from the
provided source, so distributing them may violate the DFSG.
* README.Debian:
- move directly to debian/ and remove from the install file, users
should be able to find this in /usr/share/doc/inetsim
- please keep the line width to 80 characters and start the sentences
with uppercase letters; also don't use abbreviations like PE, spell
it out (also in debian/changelog)
- the file usually includes your name, e-mail and timestamp as last
entry in the same format as debian/changelog; just look at a few of
the README.Debian files installed in your system
I will continue the review by actually trying out inetsim later this
week.
Regards
Lukas
[1]?https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/#writing-the-scripts
Reply to: