Hello Jakub Wilk,
>Section: misc
>Perhaps it should be “Section: text”?
I believe that does not fit the description of the Text section https://packages.debian.org/unstable/.
Next: Utilities to format and print text documents.
As the crunch creates lists of words and does not format or print text documents believe that would not fit in the text section.
>Crunch is a wordlist generator where you can specify a standard
>character set or any set of characters to be used in generating the
>wordlists. The word list are created through combination and
>s/list/lists/
>And is it “wordlist” or “word list”?
I now switched to wordlists.
>This program supports numbers and symbols, upper and lower case
>characters separately and unicode.
>Probably should be s/unicode/Unicode/.
I now switched to Unicode.
>Description: Added missing hyphen at line 75
>Surely it's not very important that this is line 75?
>And this patch is not adding any hyphen.
I made a mistake in the description of fix_manpage patch.
I had put the description based on lintian error that is generated in the absence of the backslash:
I: Crunch: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/crunch.1.gz: 75
I changed the description to:
Description: Added backslash before the hyphen option -s at line 75
>Description: Sudo removes the Makefile,
>Did you mean “Remove sudo from the makefile”?
>It would be nice to have this fixed upstream. (But if upstream doesn't
>like it, it's not end of the world.)
Yes, i meant "Remove sudo from the makefile", i changed the description to:
Description: Remove sudo from the makefile, fix permissions charset.lst
file and prevents the installation file COPYNG.
I tried to contact the upstream, but got no answer.
>fix permissions charset.lst file
>That part should be upstreamed, too. Although other files might need
>permission fixes, too.
I'll try to contact the upstream again.
>prevents the installation file COPYNG.
>Typo: COPYNG -> COPYING
>But I wouldn't patch upstream makefile for this; instead, I'd remove the
>file in debian/rules.
>In general, I prefer having every independent change in a separate
>patch, even when the changes are to the same file.
I changed COPYNG to COPYING.
It is necessary to exclude the portion of the patch responsible for preventing the installation of COPYING and make using the debian rules?
>Have you forwarded debian/patches/fix_sourcecode upstream?
>“fix_spelling” might be a better name for this than “fix_sourcecode”.
I changed the name of the patch to fix_spelling.
>Copyright: 2004 ? <mimayin@aciiid.ath.cx>
>What's up with this question mark?
Not possible identify the name of first author.
The email mimayin@aciiid.ath.cx not exist.
Then as we could not identify it put that way.
>License: GPL-2.0
> This package is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
> it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
> the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or
> (at your option) any later version.
>This is inconsistent. The short name says it's GPLv2, but the license
>text says it's GPLv2+.
>Incorrect information in the copyright file is a show-stopped, so
>I'm tagging the bug +moreinfo.
I put now GPL-2.0+ in debian/copyright
>The upstream didn't provide a changelog.The changelog was file
>Missing space between “changelog.” and “The”.
I put space between "changelog." and "The".
>visit the URLs below if you want to confirm all informations:
>“information” is a mass noun.
>s/all informations/all the information/, I suppose.
Modified to "all the information"
>Why is README.source shipped in the *binary* package?
So that the end user knows the changelog did not come from the upstream source code,
so I sent along the binary package.
Just upload the package with the changes mentioned in the email is already in mentors
Regards,
--
Marcio Souza <m.desouza20@gmail.com>
Attachment:
pgplH5qb6yTwP.pgp
Description: PGP signature