Hi, On Sat, 2004-11-13 at 00:02 +0100, Achim Bohnet wrote: > > Why does kimdaba have build-deps on versioned libraries? This should not be > > necessary. In general the package should only build-depend on the -dev > > package without versions (unless very necessary) and only depend on the > > libraries during build time. > > AFAIR he used a code snippet from new maintainer guide to determine > the build-deps. I'll leave the details to him. > > > > dpkg-checkbuilddeps: Unmet build dependencies: libc6 (>= 2.3.2.ds1-18 ) > > libc6-dev (>= 2.3.2.ds1-18 ) libpng12-0 (>= 1.2.5.0-8 ) libpng12-dev (>= > > 1.2.5.0-8 ) > > Mark is right, there's no need to have versioned libraries. I'll fix the Build-Depends line. > > David. Are you intending to follow through on your IPT for kimdaba? Or are you > > happy for the IPT to be taken over by Achim? (Bug#227525) The official kimdaba pkg, kimdaba_2.0-1 (without kipi-plugins support), has been already uploaded and is now pending the manual editing of the override file. > No, no, no. That kimdaba is in my repo is just because david wanted > to provide a kipi enabled kimdaba version and because David hadn't found > the time to sponsor I offered to host if in 'my' archive until kipi > pkgs entry sid. That's right. > > > > W: kimdaba source: changelog-should-mention-nmu > > Not true for david ;) Right again! > > > W: kimdaba source: source-nmu-has-incorrect-version-number 2.0-2kipi1 > > E: kimdaba source: depends-on-build-essential-package-without-using-version > > libc6-dev [build-depends: libc6-dev] Both kimdaba_2.0-1 and kimdaba_2.0-2kipi1 packages[1] are linda and lintian clean. Cheers, dave [1] http://www-gsi.dec.usc.es/~dave/projects/kimdaba/ -- David L. Moreno (david.lopez.moreno at hispalinux.es) GNU/Linux Debian SID (2.6.6-1) i686 PentiumIII Gentoo 1.4rc2 (2.4.20) sparc64(sun4u) UltraSparc I (SpitFire) GPG Public Key at: http://www-gsi.dec.usc.es/~dave/pub_key.asc Key ID: 761BF242
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part