Hi,
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 07:43:05PM +0200, Thorsten Alteholz wrote:
> On Wed, 25 May 2011, Sebastian Hilbert wrote:
>>> Indeed an initial package is already there. I applied some patch, but
>>> lintian still complain about a rpath for mpi. Apparently rpath is
>>> needed to go pass a lintian error already...
I'd say for a first shot on this package which might go to experimental
this rpath issue might be ignorable.
>> Could you please elaborate on what that means ? Is this something upstream
>> might be able to help with ?
>
> This is something that can be done in debian/rules. Normally you can just
> delete the rpath.
Lintian usually gives a hint how to fix this when called with -i option.
> I would say that the use of its own sqlite library is more serious. I am
> not really sure whether the Debian package can/should be used. They
> provide a library consisting of one big file. Due to better compiler
> optimization this should gain some performance.
We should always prefer the Debian packaged version. Usually this is
quite easy to approach in debian/rules.
> I might have missed some of the previous discussions. Is there a reason
> why upstream provides its own debian directory? If it is of any use,
> maybe it can be renamed? Otherwise svn-buildpackage would mix everything
> together and lintian complains about lots of template files.
Usually it is ugly to have upstream provided debian/ dirs and I always
try to teach upstream to leave this out. Because upstream is known to
be quite responsive this should be no problem (even if I have heard that
source format 3.0 can handle this somehow I would prefer to get rid of
it because it is at best confusing).
Please let me know if the packaging is in a ready for sponsoring state.
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-med-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110525192732.ga24...@an3as.eu
