On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 1:35 PM, Rashad M <[email protected]>
wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 5:45 PM, sebastic <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On 2015-09-22 17:10, Rashad M wrote:
>>
>>> I had pushed some modifications:
>>>
>>
>> Thanks for these changes.
>>
>> otb-apps: all applications .so are moved into this package
>>>
>>
>> Since this package only contains libraries naming it libotb-apps seems a
>> better choice consistent with the other library packages. The otb-apps name
>> suggests that it provides applications, but it does not, it provides
>> libraries only.
>>
>
> Done.
>
>>
>> Regarding symbol files, I decided not to create it right now as Russ
>>> Albery's himself mentioned that it may not be worth for large libraries
>>> with heavy usage of templates. Also OTB has version prefix in .so files
>>> which is another reason pointed out by Russ to not use symbol files.
>>>
>>> But I will try to experiment this feature and if the output symbol file
>>> is
>>> helpful, I add to debian package.
>>>
>>
>> Not using symbols files for C++ projects is perfectly fine, but need to
>> use either symbols or shlibs files for the shared libraries, this is a
>> Policy requirement:
>>
>> "
>>  To allow these dependencies to be constructed, shared libraries must
>> provide either a symbols file or a shlibs file.
>> "
>>
>>
>> https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-sharedlibs.html#s-sharedlibs-depends
>>
>> Make sure you've read and understand the entire Shared Libraries chapter
>> in the Debian Policy, this is essential for anyone packaging shared
>> libraries.
>>
>> Any package using Standards-Version >= 3.9.5 needs to make sure it
>> handles shared libraries correctly (this chapter saw significant change in
>> policy version 3.9.5).
>>
>> I had added .symbols file for libotb package.

http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-grass/otb.git/commit/?id=9d06c6e9fcf334e283decc8918559d5d368d85d0

If this seems okay I will add do the same for libotb-commandline,
libotb-apps etc..

Can you have a look?

Regarding missing ITCopyright, the issue was resolved upstream.
>>>
>>> https://bugs.orfeo-toolbox.org/view.php?id=1074
>>>
>>>
>>> Could I include that patch in the current packaging or wait for next
>>> release ?
>>>
>>
>> You don't need to include a patch for this change, it's sufficient to
>> link to the new copyright file and include its content in the relevant
>> Files section in the copyright file.
>>
>
> okay. Following upstream fix for missing ITCopyright.txt. I had update the
> Files section.
>
>>
>> Can you confirm if the package is ready for experimental?
>>>
>>
>> The missing symbols/shlibs files are still a blocker, if you're not going
>> to use symbols files you need to add shlibs files or vice versa. If you're
>> not going to do either you at least need to document your motivations in
>> the comment of the respective lintian override. Beware that not adhering to
>> the Debian Policy is a Release Critical bug that will prevent testing
>> migration or removal from testing of the offending package.
>>
>
> I will add it ASAP.
>
>
>> After I get home from work I'll start a new build with your recent
>> changes to see what else may need some more attention.
>>
>> Kind Regards,
>>
>> Bas
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
>    Rashad
>



-- 
Regards,
   Rashad

Reply via email to