Hi Vitalie,
I pick up the sponsoring process.
V> Thank you very much for your help and comments.
> libbitfield$SOVERSION (shared library)
> libbitfield-dev (development files)
V> Done. Package name changed from 'bitfield' to 'libbitfield' and SOVERSION
is set
V> to 1, so we get:
V> libbitfield1
V> libbitfield-dev
This looks good now.
> If you don't have soversioning in place, then it probably means that your
> software is still too volatile for you to think about a stable ABI / API.
If
> that's the case, then it is not a good candidate for packaging in Debian
just yet.
V> Done. SO-versioning (and versioning policy in general) has been set. ABI
/API
V> has been stabilized. Version (1.0.0) has been released.
That's also OK now.
Some further problems with the packaging:
- The link /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libbitfield.so should go to
the libbitfield-dev package.
- A shared library should have a debian/<package.>.symbols file
(see man dpkg-gensymbols).
- The standards version should be updated to 4.0.0
- The files README.{Debian,source} do not provide any real info. They should
be dropped until they contain something useful.
- Please also remove the unrelated comments at the end of debian/rules
and the comments after the DH_VERBOSE line at the beginning.
- The files debian/*.dirs are unnecessary . Please remove.
Please fix your package and ping me when done, so I can recheck.
Cheers,
Roland
