On Sun, 2005-03-20 at 23:09 +0100, jano kupec wrote: > i sent this mail four days ago accidentally only to Laszlo, sorry for > that, Ups, sorry by me, because I haven't answered it yet.
> i realized that i don't need the script so i don't use it anymore. Ah, OK. > However i see your point. But i'm still in doubt what about the > debian/rules file - it is also non-executable after applying the patch > to the original source - do we have to chmod it manually then? If you invoke patch 'by hand', then you won't get the executable flags. But in the dpkg-dev package there's a binary to make it easier for you: dpkg-source -x albumshaper_2.0-1.dsc This will unpack the original source, apply the diff and set +x on rules... > > 3) I think you should build-depends on qt3-dev-tools and not only on > > the libs (as you need qmake from the former). > > i added it there, but i thought it shouldn't be necessary since the > libqt3-mt-dev already depends on qt3-dev-tools, according to apt-cache > show libqt3-mt-dev Yes, it shows that. I do not know why I haven't had qt3-dev-tools installed then (I had to do it by hand in order to build your package, even if libqt3-mt-dev was installed before). So it is my mistake, but you can leave it there as is without any problem. > > 4) You may set DH_COMPAT to 4. > > done My second problem: now lintian complains about it being set. :( Will look into it soon. I will look into your package more deeply when the time is not after midnight. Sorry for my delay, Laszlo/GCS Ps: Do you know that upstream also put a .deb on their page but with a greater version number than yours? Maybe that's done by you as well... -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
