2017-08-23 15:37 GMT+02:00 James Cowgill <jcowg...@debian.org>: > On 23/08/17 13:04, Jaromír Mikeš wrote: >
Hi James, > > Vee One Suite has new package padthv1 > > http://www.rncbc.org/drupal/node/1846 > > https://padthv1.sourceforge.io/ > > > > I need DD to upload it to "NEW" ... can somebody do it for me? > > debian/control: > - automake is already pulled in by debhelper (via dh-autoreconf). > - Sorting your build dependencies would be nice. > - The Homepage redirects to https://padthv1.sourceforge.io/ so perhaps > that should be used? > - The word "standalone" is not a noun so it does not make sense to use > it on its own at the end of the short description. > - In the padthv1-lv2 short description, "lv2-plugin" should probably be > "LV2 plugin" or something similar. > > debian/copyright: > - Format field should be https now. > - Source field should use https. > - The short name for public domain works is "public-domain". > - You should include the actual public domain waiver statement in your > debian/copyright file (ie add the line "This work is in public domain." > to the public domain section). > - Your "BDS" license looks like the ISC license to me. > > lintian: > W: padthv1: appstream-metadata-in-legacy-location > usr/share/appdata/padthv1.appdata.xml > > Apparently the path was recently changed (it was the first time I knew > about it). > > W: padthv1-common: > package-has-unnecessary-activation-of-ldconfig-trigger > > You can probably ignore this one since it's a debhelper bug and running > ldconfig an extra time usually isn't that much of an issue. If you want > you could fix it by using "dh_makeshlibs --no-scripts" since there are > no public libraries in any package built by this source. > > Other: > The git repository already contains a bogus "debian/0.8.4-1" tag. > > Thank you for reviewing. All above done! > > On a related note, I see you've patched upstream to move the lv2 plugins > back into /usr/lib/lv2. I do not know much about lv2 plugins, but is it > a good idea to install them to a multiarch path at some point? How much > work would that be to do for every lv2 plugin in the archive? Would > doing that cause any big issues? > This is interesting topic which I already started here on list quite long time ago. I would need to search archive to find this tread. Generally problem is ( as I understand it ) that plugins hosts doesn't search for plugins in multiarch path :( Otherwise it would great to have them multiarch. mira
_______________________________________________ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
