Bug#861649: Newer version uploaded
On 16/10/17 11:22, Gard Spreemann wrote:
On Saturday 14 October 2017 00:56:11 CEST Adam Borowski wrote:
Before a human review, it'd be good to fix issues found by automated
tools. In particular, lintian throws a lot. Please run it on both
source and built packages (lintian gudhi*changes).
"lintian -i" gives a helpful explanation how to fix these problems.
Hello, and thanks a lot for getting back to me.
I *think* I have evaluated all of the lintian errors, but any
suggestions or comments are very welcome:
W: gudhi source: newer-standards-version 4.0.0 (current is 3.9.8)
Not relevant since the upload would be to sid anyway, right?
FYI, current version is 4.1.1.
E: python3-gudhi: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/gudhi.cpython-35m-x86_64-linux-gnu.so /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu
I admit I'm on thin ice here, but from
https://wiki.debian.org/RpathIssue I had the impression that the use
of RPATH is OK here since only the python3 executable would be loading
the shared object. Am I correct?
It will import is as a module, no? You should not need rpath for public
extension modules. Look for usage of `runtime_library_dirs` in the
definition of the extension module within setup.py.
W: gudhui: binary-without-manpage usr/bin/gudhui
I will work on creating a man page for this.
W: libgudhi-examples: binary-without-manpage usr/bin/libgudhi-example-*
These are very simple example programs only used together with the
documentation and their own source code. As such it feels a bit
strange for them to have manpages. I could also remove that binary
package, if you think that is better.
Ask yourself whether these are worth shipping. I suspect the examples
are more useful in source code form than binary.
W: libgudhi-examples: lib-recommends-documentation recommends: libgudhi-doc
This was actually done on purpose. The examples are really meant to be
used together with the documentation, and as such I don't think the
warning applies here. Please let me know if I'm wrong.
Did you declare libgudhi-examples as a library package instead of misc
or doc by any chance (see Section field in d/control)? Then, the warning
would be accurate. Instead, ship the examples in source code form and
make the package Section: misc.
W: libgudhi-doc: embedded-javascript-library usr/share/doc/libgudhi/html/jquery.js please use libjs-jquery
From #736360 and #736432 I had the impression that this is a
long-standing problem where there is not yet any consensus about how
to proceed. Am I overlooking something?
Indeed, that's a doxygen specific issue. You may leave it like that or
override for it. It's up to what your future sponsor prefers.
Cheers,
Ghis
Reply to: