Hi Axel,
I noticed some bugs in version 1.0.6 of fizsh. Most of them were related to my
treatment of autoconf and friends. Therefore, I decided to release version
1.0.7, which corrects these bugs. I have also uploaded the new version to
mentors:
} debian/copyright:
}
} * The licenses "BSD-3-clause~zsh-history-substring-search-contributors",
} "BSD-3-clause~fizsh" and
} "BSD-3-clause~zsh-syntax-highlighting-contributors" seem to be
} identical word-wise. In that case the license only needs to be
} spelled out respectively defined once.
}
} Of course they differ in the copyright holders, but those are
} already listed in the "Files:" starting paragraphs and should only
? be listed there.
} * The "License:" starting paragraphs only define the license text and
} do not need verbatim formatting. They should be word-wrapped if
} lines are longer than 80 columns. Comments signs from licenses
} copied from source code headers can and should be dropped.
Done.
} debian/README: This file should be probably better named
} debian/README.source.
Done
} debian/rules:
}
} * lintian warning script-not-executable
}
} # the scripts in the "./scripts/" directory of the source package are
} # copied to both "./debian/usr/bin/" and "./debian/etc/fizsh/". they
} # are also copied to "./debian/fizsh/usr/share/fizsh/", but they are
} # not meant to be copied there. moreover they end up there without the
} # executable bit, which causes lintian to complain about
} # "script-not-executable". therefore they are explicitly removed after
} # dh_install.
}
} While it is good to not have the files in the package twice, this
} maybe a case where it may have been better to override the lintian
} warning as the files are meant to be sourced (if it works without
} them being executables). This not seldom with shell-related
} packages.
}
} So just decided if you want them user-modifiable or not and put them
} in either /etc/fizsh or /usr/share/fizsh and override the above
} mentioned lintian warning.
}
} Another way to get rid of that lintian warning would be to remove the
} shebang lines from those scripts. They're not needed anyway if the
} scripts are just sourced.
The scripts ended up in the package twice because of a bug that was introduced
upstream (me as well :< ). The bug has been corrected, and so I have dropped
the override.
} * A general remark on lines like the following:
}
} [ -d foo ] && rm -rf foo || true
}
} Just using "rm -rf foo" should suffice and is easier to read:
}
} * If the directory doesn't exist, it does nothing
} * It does exit with return code 0 even if the file does not exist.
Done
} * Warnings from configure:
}
} # without the following override the ./configure script would be called with two
} # unrecognized options: --disable-maintainer-mode, --disable-dependency-tracking
} override_dh_auto_configure:
} ./configure \
} --prefix=/usr \
} --includedir=\${prefix}/include \
} --mandir=\${prefix}/share/man \
} --infodir=\${prefix}/share/info \
} --sysconfdir=/etc \
} --localstatedir=/var
}
} I think those warnings can be safely ignored and hence the override
} could be dropped. I'm though fine if you are annoyed by the warnings
} and prefer to keep the override. (I'd be rather annoyed by such a
} long override. :-)
Done
} debian/changelog:
}
} * While it is acceptable, I find the style with a blank line between
} each item hard to read.
}
} * I'd also indent any line not starting wit "*" by two blanks.
Done
} debian/watch and .sig files:
}
} * The .sig files mentioned in the context of pgpsigurlmangle are meant
} to be signature files, not public key files as on [1]. See the
} documentation for "gpg --sign" for details. The public key file goes
} into debian/upstream/signing-key.asc as done correctly with the
} package.
}
}
} I'd be nice if you could fix that at "upstream".
Done. I have changed the watch file, so that it will look for signature files
ending in ".asc". Upstream has uploaded a file called
should match the signature in ./debian/upstream/signing-key.asc
} To not only mention negative stuff I noticed, I was also positively
} surprised that the package is indeed lintian clean, even with
} --pedantic and --experimental!
Thank you for reviewing the package!
Best wishes
Guido