Re: Debian package for PGF 2.10
Hi Faheem
2011/2/27 Faheem Mitha <faheem@email.unc.edu>:
>
> Ohura-san is planning an update, yes. See
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=606128
I see.
> Actually, I just built the package with a few minor changes to the 2.0
> Debian packaging.
>
> Lintian reports the following errors/warnings.
>
> faheem@orwell:/usr/local/src/pgf$ lintian pgf_2.10-0_all.deb
>
> E: pgf: debian-revision-should-not-be-zero 2.10-0
> W: pgf: doc-base-abstract-field-is-template pgf:6
> W: pgf: executable-not-elf-or-script
> ./usr/share/texmf/tex/generic/pgf/math/pgfmathutil.code.tex
> W: pgf: executable-not-elf-or-script
> ./usr/share/texmf/tex/generic/pgf/math/pgfmathcalc.code.tex
> W: pgf: executable-not-elf-or-script
> ./usr/share/texmf/tex/generic/pgf/math/pgfmathparser.code.tex
> W: pgf: maintainer-script-empty preinst
> W: pgf: command-with-path-in-maintainer-script postinst:24 /usr/bin/mktexlsr
> W: pgf: maintainer-script-empty prerm
> W: pgf: command-with-path-in-maintainer-script postrm:25 /usr/bin/mktexlsr
>
> 2) The executable-not-elf-or-script presumably mean that these files
> shouldn't be executable? It is true that these three files under that
> directory are executable, but the rest aren't. Probably an unstream issue.
If you build the package with something like a "get-orig-source"
target, then you will always have this issue. You can add a "chmod
-x" in the debian/rules, and later on ask upstream to remove the
executable bit.
> 3) debian-revision-should-not-be-zero refers to
> http://lintian.debian.org/tags/doc-base-abstract-field-is-template.html
You mean "doc-base-abstract-field-is-template" I presume.
> I guess this refers to /usr/share/doc-base/pgf and specifically the
> description field. Ie.
>
> Document: pgf
> Title: User s Guide to the PGF Package, Version
> Author: Till Tantau <tantau@cs.tu-berlin.de>
> Abstract: This manual describes what pgf is
> and how it can be used to
> manage online manuals on Debian systems.
That is indeed the default text and should be changed.
> Possibly the Title should be
>
> User's Guide to the PGF Package, Version 2.10
>
> and the Abstract something like
>
> Abstract: Guide for usage of PGF and TikZ.
>
> Not sure what one should say here.
You could add some attributes like how thorough and beautifully
written the documentation is. That's one of the first things that
impressed me when I looked at PGF and TikZ.
Most documents are boring and technical, but this guide has a nice
introduction, large reference material, etc. Add something that
compels end users to download the manual.
> 4) maintainer-script-empty preinst (ditto for prerm)
> refers to http://lintian.debian.org/tags/maintainer-script-empty.html
>
> So preinst and prerm should be removed?
Yes.
> 5) command-with-path-in-maintainer-script? This refers to
> http://lintian.debian.org/tags/command-with-path-in-maintainer-script.html.
> Should one just use mktexlsr then?
Definitely. Sometimes you would want to have your own "mktexlsr" and
therefore change the $PATH variable.
> I tried using the package and it seems to work ok.
Nice.
> However
>
> texdoctk pgf
>
> does not work.
>
> Running just
>
> texdoctk
>
> and then searching for pgf brings up a window, but when I click on it I get
> an error. So I must have done something wrong here.
I believe there was a discussion a long time ago about the differences
between texdoc and texdoctk. texdoc is the one used by TeX Live; I
don't know if texdoctk is still actively maintained, but was used with
teTeX. Try "texdoc -s pgf" to get some results in a terminal.
Best regards
--
Danai
Reply to: