Bug#930595: RFS: uacme/1.0.15-2 [ITP]
On Sun, Jun 16, 2019 at 12:55:38PM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
Hi Adam
There's already a team in Debian dedicated to packaging of stuff made by
that anvil-making company. Have you contacted them?
Yes, in April and unfortunately I received no reply.
The package doesn't build for me:
http://ix.io/1LVo
./configure: line 5401: syntax error near unexpected token `$CFLAGS'
./configure: line 5401: `AX_CHECK_COMPILE_FLAG($CFLAGS -Wall, CFLAGS="$CFLAGS -Wall")'
I'm afraid I forgot to build-depend on autoconf-archive... If you
install it it should work. I'll fix it.
Not building something (like the man page) from source is usually a serious
error. In this particular case, groff is nearly as sourcey format as
asciidoc -- but it'd still be a problem with upstreaming. Someone wanting
to improve the man page can't easily test asciidoc (as the patched build
system doesn't use that) yet improvements done as groffage wouldn't be liked
by upstream (in this case you). But, what about using asciidoctor instead?
That's supposed to be a drop-in replacement for asciidoc.
The reason I patched it out is because I thought it's better not to
build-depend on asciidoc (as I do not regenerate the docs unless I make
a new revision). But of course I am happy to remove the patch and
build-depend on asciidoc.
Your upstream project seems to use straightforward sane github-based release
workflow, that makes watch files easy to write (just copy one of existing
recipes). Watch files are not mandatory, but are nice to have.
Since I am both upstream and packager, I generate the orig tarball with
autoconf's make dist, then archive it with pristine-tar in the git
repository using gbp importpackage and the third option in
https://wiki.debian.org/PackagingWithGit#Upstream_import_methods
the page above links to this, so I just put comments in an otherwise
empty watch file.
https://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/notes/debian/git.html
If you don't have a working debian/watch file or don't want to use
uscan, you can also download the upstream release tarball, omit the
--uscan flag to gbp import-orig, and just provide the path to the
upstream release tarball. I do this when packaging software for
which I'm also upstream, since I generally prepare the Debian
package with a local release tarball that I haven't published yet,
and then publish the release tarball and the Debian package at the
same time.
A new package can be uploaded only to unstable (or experimental) -- your
version is targetted at stretch. For a backport, it needs to first be in
testing, thus please retarget at unstable even if you eventually do want to
include a backport later. And, we care about future releases more than
past.
Ok, will target unstable.
But generally, the above problems aside, the package seems to be well made.
Many thanks for taking the time to review it. I will make the changes
mentioned and post a new version.
Reply to: