Hi! On Thu, 2011-03-31 at 12:02:36 +0300, Peter Pentchev wrote: > What do you think about the attached series of patches that aim to > refresh the ufsutils packaging a little bit? :)
I've applied few, others not, details below. > Thanks again for all you're all doing for Debian, and keep up the good work! Thank you for the patches! > Subject: [PATCH 01/15] Refresh the patches before the 3.0 (quilt) conversion. > Subject: [PATCH 02/15] Convert to the 3.0 (quilt) source format. I had done the the source format conversion for the whole glibc-bsd repo, before I saw these patches. > Subject: [PATCH 03/15] Honor CPPFLAGS and LDFLAGS; do not link with CFLAGS. > Subject: [PATCH 05/15] Remove the duplicate section "utils". > Subject: [PATCH 07/15] dpkg-dev knows about Package-Type now. Applied. > Subject: [PATCH 04/15] Use dpkg-buildflags to get CFLAGS, CPPFLAGS and > LDFLAGS. > Subject: [PATCH 08/15] Move the upstream source comment to the watch file. Applied with some modifications. > Subject: [PATCH 06/15] Convert the copyright file to the DEP 5 format. Not applied for now, until the format stabilizes I don't really feel like using it. I've dropped the common-license reference in another commit though. > Subject: [PATCH 09/15] Bump Standards-Version to 3.9.1 with no changes. I had already bumped all the glibc-bsd packages to 3.9.2. > Subject: [PATCH 10/15] Drop the version on the libc0.1-dev dependency. Not applied, for backporting sake. Also if we were to drop the version, then the whole libc0.1-dev should be dropeed as it's build-essential. > Subject: [PATCH 11/15] Shorten the rules file by using the dh(1) helper. > Subject: [PATCH 12/15] Minimize the rules file by using debhelper overrides. Not applied, I don't really like the “new-style” dh(1) rules files, to me they have the same drawbacks as cdbs, although with the addition of needing the helper to invoke debian/rules to get stuff done... > Subject: [PATCH 13/15] Bump the debhelper compat level to 8 with no changes. Not applied, for backporting sake, also I don't think we need anything provided by such recent version. > Subject: [PATCH 14/15] Depend on libncurses-dev instead of libncurses5-dev. I've removed the dependency instead, dpkg-shlibdeps has been complaining about it for a while now. > Subject: [PATCH 15/15] Harden the build by default. Not applied, I'd rather see the safe ones set by default by the build system instead. Might reconsider later on. thanks, guillem -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110530064829.ga4...@gaara.hadrons.org
