Re: library files are not included in the .deb files
On Sat, 2005-07-09 at 16:00 -0400, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote:
> Mattia Dongili wrote:
>
> >On Sat, Jul 09, 2005 at 02:13:58PM -0400, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote:
> >
> >
> >>I am trying to package a library whose upstream is located at
> >>http://sourceforge.net/projects/fortranposix
> >>
> >>
> >>I already read the libpkg-guide, maint-guide. This problem was not
> >>discussed in any of them. I googled and also asked in the irc about this
> >>problem.
> >>
> >>There were no errors/warnings when I checked the final packages with
> >>linda -i and lintian -i. But when I did dpkg -c, there are no libraries
> >>in the packages.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >maybe it's just something wrong within your
> >debian/.{install,dirs,whatever} files (if you're using
> >debhelper scripts
> >
> >[...]
> >
> >
> >>$dpkg -c libfortranposix0-dev_0.1-1_i386.deb
> >>drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2005-07-09 13:46:00 ./
> >>drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2005-07-09 13:46:00 ./usr/
> >>drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2005-07-09 13:45:59 ./usr/bin/
> >>drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2005-07-09 13:45:59 ./usr/sbin/
> >>
> >>
> >
> >/usr/sbin and /usr/sbin are useless, don't create them. They look like
> >the default entries for the dirs file created by dh_make :)
> >
> >
> done.
>
> >[...]
> >
> >
> >>make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/rajulocal/practice/fortranposix-0.1'
> >>dh_testdir
> >>dh_testroot
> >>dh_installchangelogs CHANGES
> >>dh_installdocs
> >>dh_installexamples
> >>dh_installman
> >>dh_link
> >>dh_strip
> >>dh_compress
> >>dh_fixperms
> >>dh_installdeb
> >>dh_shlibdeps
> >>dh_gencontrol
> >>dpkg-gencontrol: warning: unknown substitution variable ${shlibs:Depends}
> >>dpkg-gencontrol: warning: unknown substitution variable ${misc:Depends}
> >>dh_md5sums
> >>dh_builddeb
> >>dpkg-deb: building package `libfortranposix0-dev' in
> >>`../libfortranposix0-dev_0.1-1_i386.deb'.
> >>dpkg-deb: building package `libfortranposix0' in
> >>`../libfortranposix0_0.1-1_i386.deb'.
> >> signfile fortranposix_0.1-1.dsc
> >>
> >>
> >
> >can't see dh_install in the above list, might be the problem?
> >Could you eventually put your debian/* scrips somewhere to give them a
> >look?
> >
> >
>
> I have added dh_install in the binary-arch: stanza of the rules files.
> Still the library files are not included in the .deb files.
Try:
dh_install --sourcedir=debian/tmp
in the rules file.
Steve
> The new
> build.log can be found at
>
> http://24.58.7.0/debian-mentors/fortranposix-0.1/build.log
>
> Is there any website where I can upload the debian directory? For now, I
> have set up a web server on my laptop and all the relevent files can be
> found at
>
> http://24.58.7.0/debian-mentors/
>
> If there is any public website where I can upload this stuff that would
> be great.
>
> thanks
> raju
>
> --
> Kamaraju S Kusumanchi
> Graduate Student, MAE
> Cornell University
> http://www.people.cornell.edu/pages/kk288/
>
>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: library files are not included in the .deb files
make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/rajulocal/practice/fortranposix-0.1'
dh_testdir
dh_testroot
dh_installchangelogs CHANGES
dh_installdocs
dh_installexamples
dh_installman
dh_link
dh_strip
dh_compress
dh_fixperms
dh_installdeb
dh_shlibdeps
dh_gencontrol
dpkg-gencontrol: warning: unknown substitution variable ${shlibs:Depends}
dpkg-gencontrol: warning: unknown substitution variable ${misc:Depends}
dh_md5sums
dh_builddeb
dpkg-deb: building package `libfortranposix0-dev' in
`../libfortranposix0-dev_0.1-1_i386.deb'.
dpkg-deb: building package `libfortranposix0' in
`../libfortranposix0_0.1-1_i386.deb'.
signfile fortranposix_0.1-1.dsc
can't see dh_install in the above list, might be the problem?
Could you eventually put your debian/* scrips somewhere to give them a
look?
I have added dh_install in the binary-arch: stanza of the rules files.
Still the library files are not included in the .deb files.
Try:
dh_install --sourcedir=debian/tmp
in the rules file.
Steve
That did the trick. Now, the library files are included in the .deb files.
thanks
raju
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: (better explaining) Re: Hi! I need faqs and tutorials for make gcc*.deb's
Hi! Thank's for your ultra quickly response:-) For now, I have more one question: I need learn about * "Multiple"-binary * in sense of maint-guide. (from one [or two:] souce tarball, to many binaries.deb) The maint-guide teaching me about "single"-binary but nothing about "multiple" ... My question is : where I find docs, tutorials, etc about use of dh_make for making multiple binaries ? Thank's a Lot! :-) []'s of Seventy rounds, Dani:-) p.s.: I'm going studying the source.deb of gcc. Thanks for the hint. p.s.: Thank's for understanding my english:-) 2005/7/9, Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Sat, Jul 09, 2005 at 02:17:01AM -0300, Dani wrote: > > hi! my system is a Debian Testing. I use a Athlon Xp1.7 (x86) and > > I already installed the tools give in "maint-guide". I tried hard _but_ > > *all* > > tutorials that I encounter use this estructure: > > > > # apt-get source gcc-X.Y > > # cd gcc-X.Y > > # dpkg-buildpackage ( or debuild ) > > ... > > > > But this is _not_ what I need. my need is take a gcc from gcc.gnu.org > > and make a (more or less) complete debianization and of course in a > > gcc that NOT yet packaged for Debian. for now, this is for my personal use. > > Your best bet is *probably* going to be to port the existing packaging > scripts for gcc to the version of gcc you want to build. That may or may > not be simple (gcc is a pretty complex package), but it's the standard > method of making packages of new versions of existing packages. > > - Matt > > > BodyID:1139165.2.n.logpart (stored separately) > > -- "There are many plans in the Human heart, But is the Lord's Purpose that prevails" []'s Dani:-)
Re: (better explaining) Re: Hi! I need faqs and tutorials for make gcc*.deb's
On Sat, Jul 09, 2005 at 10:44:40PM -0300, Dani wrote: > Hi! Thank's for your ultra quickly response:-) > > For now, I have more one question: I need learn about > * "Multiple"-binary * in sense of maint-guide. (from one [or two:] > souce tarball, > to many binaries.deb) > > The maint-guide teaching me about "single"-binary but nothing > about "multiple" ... > > My question is : where I find docs, tutorials, etc about use > of dh_make for making multiple binaries ? dh_make is just a template, and the difference between what it outputs for "single binary" is very similar to what it outputs for "multiple binary". The difference is entirely within ./debian/control. Check the policy manual for the definition of that file. In short, the first entry describes the "source" package, and each successive entry describes a binary package which is built from that source package. ./debian/rules might also be a bit different (in the argument to dpkg-buildpackage maybe). Indeed, gcc will be a complicated beast to package for a personal project. You might also refer to some OTHER existing packages, which creates multiple binary packages, as a reference. A list of 200 candidates is given by: apt-cache search data |grep -- -data openssh and gaim also come to mind. (Check the "binary packages" section of pacakges.qa.d.o). Cheers, Justin > 2005/7/9, Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > On Sat, Jul 09, 2005 at 02:17:01AM -0300, Dani wrote: > > > hi! my system is a Debian Testing. I use a Athlon Xp1.7 (x86) and > > > I already installed the tools give in "maint-guide". I tried hard _but_ > > > *all* > > > tutorials that I encounter use this estructure: > > > > > > # apt-get source gcc-X.Y > > > # cd gcc-X.Y > > > # dpkg-buildpackage ( or debuild ) > > > ... > > > > > > But this is _not_ what I need. my need is take a gcc from gcc.gnu.org > > > and make a (more or less) complete debianization and of course in a > > > gcc that NOT yet packaged for Debian. for now, this is for my personal > > > use. > > > > Your best bet is *probably* going to be to port the existing packaging > > scripts for gcc to the version of gcc you want to build. That may or may > > not be simple (gcc is a pretty complex package), but it's the standard > > method of making packages of new versions of existing packages. > > > > - Matt > > > > > > BodyID:1139165.2.n.logpart (stored separately) > > > > > > > -- > "There are many plans in the Human heart, But > is the Lord's Purpose that prevails" > > []'s Dani:-) > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
making backport debs with dpkg-buildpackage
I have both GCC 4.0 and GCC 3.3.5 installed. GCC 4.0 is intended for future distributions and GCC 3.3.5 is intended for backport to sarge. When I invoke dpkg-buildpackage to build my debs, how can I specify which compiler and which libstdc++ libraries dpkg-buildpackage to use? Thanks, Kai-Cheung Leung -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: making backport debs with dpkg-buildpackage
also sprach Kai-Cheung Leung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.07.09.0937 +0200]: > I have both GCC 4.0 and GCC 3.3.5 installed. GCC 4.0 is intended for > future distributions and GCC 3.3.5 is intended for backport to sarge. > When I invoke dpkg-buildpackage to build my debs, how can I specify which > compiler and which libstdc++ libraries dpkg-buildpackage to use? Does CC=gcc-3.3 CXX=g++-3.3 dpkg-buildpackage work? If not then the only way to do so is to provide /usr/local/bin/gcc or ~/bin/gcc (before /usr/bin in the $PATH) to call the appropriate one based on e.g. another environment variable. Maybe it would be worth the create a new package which diverts /usr/bin/gcc and /usr/bin/g++ and puts scripts into its place which read and honour $DEBIAN_GCC_VERSION? -- Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list! .''`. martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : :' :proud Debian developer and author: http://debiansystem.info `. `'` `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system Invalid/expired PGP subkeys? Use subkeys.pgp.net as keyserver! perl -e 'print "The earth is a disk!\n" if ( "earth" == "flat" );' signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: making backport debs with dpkg-buildpackage
On Sat, Jul 09, 2005 at 07:37:31PM +1200, Kai-Cheung Leung wrote: > I have both GCC 4.0 and GCC 3.3.5 installed. GCC 4.0 is intended for > future distributions and GCC 3.3.5 is intended for backport to sarge. > When I invoke dpkg-buildpackage to build my debs, how can I specify which > compiler and which libstdc++ libraries dpkg-buildpackage to use? I suggest to use pbuilder with a sarge chroot in which you use both apt repositories of the official sarge distribution _and_ an apt repository of yours with packages already backported. Cheers. -- Stefano Zacchiroli -*- Computer Science PhD student @ Uny Bologna, Italy [EMAIL PROTECTED],debian.org,bononia.it} -%- http://www.bononia.it/zack/ If there's any real truth it's that the entire multidimensional infinity of the Universe is almost certainly being run by a bunch of maniacs. -!- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#317430: ITP: apt-history -- logs the changes when installing
Hallo David, * David Pashley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-07-09 12:02]: > On Jul 09, 2005 at 01:14, Nico Golde praised the llamas by saying: sn > beebo root% grep upgrade /var/log/dpkg.log | tail > 2005-07-09 01:17:02 upgrade eog 2.10.0-0.2 2.10.2-0.1 > 2005-07-09 01:17:09 upgrade gaim 1:1.3.1-2 1:1.4.0-1 > 2005-07-09 01:17:10 upgrade gaim-data 1:1.3.1-2 1:1.4.0-1 > 2005-07-09 01:17:14 upgrade gcj 4:4.0.0-1 4:4.0.0-2 > 2005-07-09 01:17:15 upgrade gij 4:4.0.0-1 4:4.0.0-2 > 2005-07-09 01:17:19 upgrade libasound2 1.0.9-2 1.0.9-3 > 2005-07-09 01:17:19 upgrade libsensors3 1:2.9.1-3 1:2.9.1-4 > 2005-07-09 01:17:20 upgrade ucf 1.18 2.000 > 2005-07-09 01:17:23 upgrade libavc1394-0 0.5.0-2 0.5.1-1 > 2005-07-09 01:17:24 upgrade ssh 1:4.1p1-5 1:4.1p1-6 > > What else am I missing? Does apt-history hook into /etc/apt/apt.conf or > just a wrapper around dpkg.log? But for example: apt-history show install 2005-07-09 00:12:03: install libstdc++6-4.0-dev 4.0.0-12 2005-07-09 00:12:03: install libaa1 1.4p5-28 2005-07-09 00:12:03: install libstdc++6 4.0.0-12 2005-07-09 00:12:03: install g++-4.0 4.0.0-12 2005-07-09 00:12:03: install gcc-4.0 4.0.0-12 2005-07-09 00:12:03: install cpp-4.0 4.0.0-12 2005-07-09 10:00:09: install fireflies2.05-1 2005-07-09 10:00:09: install aptitude 0.2.15.9-3 2005-07-09 10:02:28: install libgtop2-5 2.10.2-1 2005-07-09 10:03:13: install apt-listchanges 2.59-0.2 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/home/nion$ grep install /var/log/dpkg.log | tail 2005-07-09 12:02:20 install libgtop2-5 2.10.2-1 2005-07-09 12:02:20 status half-installed libgtop2-5 2.10.2-1 2005-07-09 12:02:26 status installed libgtop2-5 2.10.2-1 2005-07-09 12:02:28 status installed slmon 0.5.13-2 2005-07-09 12:03:07 install apt-listchanges 2.59-0.2 2.59-0.2 2005-07-09 12:03:07 status half-installed apt-listchanges 2.59-0.2 2005-07-09 12:03:12 status installed apt-listchanges 2.59-0.2 2005-07-09 12:04:00 status installed plotutils 2.4.1-12 2005-07-09 12:04:02 status half-installed plotutils 2.4.1-12 2005-07-09 12:04:02 status not-installed plotutils I think there is apt-history a better way. No it isn't a wrapper around the dpkg.log it only uses /var/lib/dpkg/status regards Nico -- Nico Golde - JAB: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | GPG: 0x73647CFF http://www.ngolde.de | http://www.muttng.org | http://grml.org VIM has two modes - the one in which it beeps and the one in which it doesn't -- encrypted mail preferred pgp1W2ysnKNy4.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Bug#317430: ITP: apt-history -- logs the changes when installing
Hi, * Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-07-09 12:02]: > #include > * Nico Golde [Sat, Jul 09 2005, 02:14:22AM]: > > > sudo apt-history show upgrade > > 2005-07-09 00:12:03: upgrade gstreamer0.8-alsa=0.8.8-3 > > 0.8.10-1 > > 2005-07-09 00:12:03: upgrade libbonobo2-common=2.8.1-2 > > 2.10.0-1 > > 2005-07-09 00:12:03: upgrade gnome-desktop-data=2.10.1-2 > > 2.10.2-1 > > 2005-07-09 00:12:03: upgrade libgimp2.0=2.2.7-1 > > 2.2.8-2 > > 2005-07-09 00:12:03: upgrade findutils=4.2.22-1 > > 4.2.22-2 > > 2005-07-09 00:12:03: upgrade e2fslibs=1.37+1.38-WIP-0620-1 > > 1.38-1 > > 2005-07-09 00:12:03: upgrade dselect=1.13.9 > > 1.13.10 > > 2005-07-09 00:12:03: upgrade libgnome-keyring0=0.4.2-1 > > 0.4.3-1 > > 2005-07-09 00:12:03: upgrade login=1:4.0.3-35 > > 1:4.0.3-36 > > 2005-07-09 00:12:03: upgrade zlib1g-dev=1:1.2.2-4 > > 1:1.2.2-7 > > 2005-07-09 00:12:03: upgrade libgcrypt11-dev=1.2.0-11.1 > > 1.2.1-1 > > 2005-07-09 00:12:03: upgrade telnet=0.17-29 > > 0.17-30 > > 2005-07-09 00:12:03: upgrade libqdbm-dev=1.8.30-1 > > 1.8.30-2 > > > > I think it is a nice little tool to furbish the information so I think > > it would be good to have this in the tool chain. > > And please correct me if I missed something > > If I understand you correctly, you are going to write a simple little > logfile parser (few LOC perl code). No :) > I would not create a separate > package just for this purpose - better pass it over to apt maintainers. Mhm maybe some others can test it and say what they like better? You can find a package on: http://nion.modprobe.de/debian/apt-history/ Regards Nico -- Nico Golde - JAB: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | GPG: 0x73647CFF http://www.ngolde.de | http://www.muttng.org | http://grml.org VIM has two modes - the one in which it beeps and the one in which it doesn't -- encrypted mail preferred pgpp7F1TpXJn3.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Bug#317430: ITP: apt-history -- logs the changes when installing
#include * Nico Golde [Sat, Jul 09 2005, 12:06:54PM]: > But for example: > apt-history show install > 2005-07-09 00:12:03: install libstdc++6-4.0-dev > 4.0.0-12 > 2005-07-09 00:12:03: install libaa1 > 1.4p5-28 > 2005-07-09 00:12:03: install libstdc++6 > 4.0.0-12 > 2005-07-09 00:12:03: install g++-4.0 > 4.0.0-12 > 2005-07-09 00:12:03: install gcc-4.0 > 4.0.0-12 > 2005-07-09 00:12:03: install cpp-4.0 > 4.0.0-12 > 2005-07-09 10:00:09: install fireflies2.05-1 > 2005-07-09 10:00:09: install aptitude > 0.2.15.9-3 > 2005-07-09 10:02:28: install libgtop2-5 > 2.10.2-1 > 2005-07-09 10:03:13: install apt-listchanges > 2.59-0.2 > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/home/nion$ grep install /var/log/dpkg.log | tail > 2005-07-09 12:02:20 install libgtop2-5 2.10.2-1 > 2005-07-09 12:02:20 status half-installed libgtop2-5 2.10.2-1 > 2005-07-09 12:02:26 status installed libgtop2-5 2.10.2-1 > 2005-07-09 12:02:28 status installed slmon 0.5.13-2 > 2005-07-09 12:03:07 install apt-listchanges 2.59-0.2 2.59-0.2 > 2005-07-09 12:03:07 status half-installed apt-listchanges 2.59-0.2 > 2005-07-09 12:03:12 status installed apt-listchanges 2.59-0.2 > 2005-07-09 12:04:00 status installed plotutils 2.4.1-12 > 2005-07-09 12:04:02 status half-installed plotutils 2.4.1-12 > 2005-07-09 12:04:02 status not-installed plotutils Sounds like an arbitrary constructed example for me and the opposite (of whatever you tried to demonstrate) can be prooved by using a correct regexp, eg. grep " install " /var/log/dpkg.log | tail 2005-07-04 20:43:33 install libslang2-dev 2.0.4-2 2005-07-04 23:51:22 install libneon25 0.25.1.dfsg-1 2005-07-06 19:52:33 install gcc-4.0 4.0.0-12 2005-07-06 19:52:34 install libstdc++6-4.0-dev 4.0.0-12 2005-07-06 19:52:35 install g++-4.0 4.0.0-12 2005-07-07 20:19:35 install python2.3-elementtree 1.2.6-3 2005-07-07 20:19:35 install bzr 0.0.5-2.1 2005-07-07 21:10:16 install scsi-idle 2.4.23-5 2005-07-08 20:57:42 install ethereal 0.10.11-1 2005-07-09 09:36:19 install libaa1 1.4p5-28 > I think there is apt-history a better way. For doing what exactly? > No it isn't a wrapper around the dpkg.log it only uses /var/lib/dpkg/status > regards Nico No, it is an overengineered solution which reads the whole dpkg database for no real benefit. Regards, Eduard. -- Teamwork ist, wenn fünf Leute für etwas bezahlt werden, was vier billiger tun können, wenn sie nur zu dritt wären und zwei davon verhindert. -- Charles Saunders signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: making backport debs with dpkg-buildpackage
Am 2005-07-09 19:37:31, schrieb Kai-Cheung Leung: > I have both GCC 4.0 and GCC 3.3.5 installed. GCC 4.0 is intended for > future distributions and GCC 3.3.5 is intended for backport to sarge. > When I invoke dpkg-buildpackage to build my debs, how can I specify which > compiler and which libstdc++ libraries dpkg-buildpackage to use? I was puzzeling around with this too... The only way I see, is to use "pbuilder" and for each release (Woody, Sarge, Etch, Sid) its own chroot. > Thanks, > > Kai-Cheung Leung Greetings Michelle -- Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/ Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 ICQ #328449886 50, rue de Soultz MSM LinuxMichi 0033/3/8845235667100 Strasbourg/France IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com) signature.pgp Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#317430: ITP: apt-history -- logs the changes when installing
Hallo Eduard, * Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-07-09 13:02]: > #include > * Nico Golde [Sat, Jul 09 2005, 12:06:54PM]: [...] > > I think there is apt-history a better way. > > For doing what exactly? For doing this without corebutils. regards nico -- Nico Golde - JAB: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | GPG: 0x73647CFF http://www.ngolde.de | http://www.muttng.org | http://grml.org VIM has two modes - the one in which it beeps and the one in which it doesn't -- encrypted mail preferred pgpW5BcklrlKV.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Bug#317430: ITP: apt-history -- logs the changes when installing
#include * Nico Golde [Sat, Jul 09 2005, 01:04:23PM]: > > > I think there is apt-history a better way. > > > > For doing what exactly? > > For doing this without corebutils. a) grep it is not in coreutils but in the grep package b) you seem to have an allergy to essential packages (you know, those installed on every system, like grep, bash, ...) or is there any other reason to justify a PYTHON installation for a tool without extra features? Regards, Eduard. -- Susan Ivanova: An expedition to Coronis space found Sheridan's ship a few days later, but they never found him. All the airlocks were sealed, but there was no trace of him inside. Some of the Minbari believe he will come back some day, but I never say him again in my lifetime... -- Quotes from Babylon 5 -- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#317430: ITP: apt-history -- logs the changes when installing
Hallo Eduard, * Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-07-09 13:26]: > #include > * Nico Golde [Sat, Jul 09 2005, 01:04:23PM]: > > > > I think there is apt-history a better way. > > > > > > For doing what exactly? > > > > For doing this without corebutils. > > a) grep it is not in coreutils but in the grep package I don't talked about the package :) Everybody is using it so i is core :) > b) you seem to have an allergy to essential packages (you know, > those installed on every system, like grep, bash, ...) or is there any > other reason to justify a PYTHON installation for a tool without extra > features? I have no allergy to essential packages, but I don't think that it is very userfriendly to say oh use these tools combined with this if you want info if you can use just one tool. Especially because there are alot of users (maybe new to linux) wo want to know these infos but are not familiar with these tools. Regards Nico -- Nico Golde - JAB: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | GPG: 0x73647CFF http://www.ngolde.de | http://www.muttng.org | http://grml.org VIM has two modes - the one in which it beeps and the one in which it doesn't -- encrypted mail preferred pgpxIzA9qQbrd.pgp Description: PGP signature
Rock bottom prices on top selling titles!
Save money on buying software!!! http://bzpij.k9ohn12dzckrz32.lhotacg.com I paint objects as I think them, not as I see them. A companion's words of persuasion are effective. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
library files are not included in the .deb files
I am trying to package a library whose upstream is located at http://sourceforge.net/projects/fortranposix I already read the libpkg-guide, maint-guide. This problem was not discussed in any of them. I googled and also asked in the irc about this problem. There were no errors/warnings when I checked the final packages with linda -i and lintian -i. But when I did dpkg -c, there are no libraries in the packages. $dpkg -c libfortranposix0_0.1-1_i386.deb drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2005-07-09 13:46:00 ./ drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2005-07-09 13:46:00 ./usr/ drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2005-07-09 13:46:00 ./usr/share/ drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2005-07-09 13:46:00 ./usr/share/doc/ drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2005-07-09 13:46:00 ./usr/share/doc/libfortranposix0/ -rw-r--r-- root/root 707 2004-11-21 02:47:24 ./usr/share/doc/libfortranposix0/changelog.gz -rw-r--r-- root/root 1138 2005-07-09 13:42:58 ./usr/share/doc/libfortranposix0/copyright -rw-r--r-- root/root 277 2005-07-09 13:42:59 ./usr/share/doc/libfortranposix0/changelog.Debian.gz $dpkg -c libfortranposix0-dev_0.1-1_i386.deb drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2005-07-09 13:46:00 ./ drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2005-07-09 13:46:00 ./usr/ drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2005-07-09 13:45:59 ./usr/bin/ drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2005-07-09 13:45:59 ./usr/sbin/ drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2005-07-09 13:46:00 ./usr/share/ drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2005-07-09 13:46:00 ./usr/share/doc/ drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2005-07-09 13:46:00 ./usr/share/doc/libfortranposix0-dev/ -rw-r--r-- root/root 707 2004-11-21 02:47:24 ./usr/share/doc/libfortranposix0-dev/changelog.gz -rw-r--r-- root/root 1198 2004-11-21 02:47:24 ./usr/share/doc/libfortranposix0-dev/CHANGES -rw-r--r-- root/root 1420 2004-04-25 05:47:47 ./usr/share/doc/libfortranposix0-dev/CREDITS -rw-r--r-- root/root 2911 2004-11-21 02:46:26 ./usr/share/doc/libfortranposix0-dev/README -rw-r--r-- root/root 1315 2004-11-21 02:48:02 ./usr/share/doc/libfortranposix0-dev/TODO -rw-r--r-- root/root 287 2005-07-09 13:42:59 ./usr/share/doc/libfortranposix0-dev/README.Debian -rw-r--r-- root/root 1138 2005-07-09 13:42:58 ./usr/share/doc/libfortranposix0-dev/copyright -rw-r--r-- root/root 277 2005-07-09 13:42:59 ./usr/share/doc/libfortranposix0-dev/changelog.Debian.gz While building the packages, I stored the output in build.log which is attached in the end. This file was generated by dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot 2>&1 | tee build.log The libraries are actually generated during this as can be seen from $tree fortranposix-0.1/debian/tmp/ fortranposix-0.1/debian/tmp/ `-- usr `-- lib |-- libfortranposix.a `-- libfortranposix.so.0.0.0 2 directories, 2 files I don't know what I am doing wrong. Could someone tell me why these libraries are not included in the .deb files? thanks raju -- Kamaraju S Kusumanchi Graduate Student, MAE Cornell University http://www.people.cornell.edu/pages/kk288/ --- build.log - dpkg-buildpackage: source package is fortranposix dpkg-buildpackage: source version is 0.1-1 dpkg-buildpackage: source changed by Kamaraju Kusumanchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> dpkg-buildpackage: host architecture i386 fakeroot debian/rules clean dh_testdir dh_testroot rm -f build-stamp configure-stamp # Add here commands to clean up after the build process. /usr/bin/make clean make[1]: Entering directory `/home/rajulocal/practice/fortranposix-0.1' rm -f *.lo rm -f *.o make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/rajulocal/practice/fortranposix-0.1' dh_clean dpkg-source -b fortranposix-0.1 dpkg-source: building fortranposix using existing fortranposix_0.1.orig.tar.gz dpkg-source: building fortranposix in fortranposix_0.1-1.diff.gz dpkg-source: warning: file Makefile has no final newline (either original or modified version) dpkg-source: building fortranposix in fortranposix_0.1-1.dsc debian/rules build dh_testdir # Add here commands to configure the package. touch configure-stamp dh_testdir # Add here commands to compile the package. /usr/bin/make make[1]: Entering directory `/home/rajulocal/practice/fortranposix-0.1' gfortran-4.0 -O2 -Wall -fPIC -c fortranposix.f90 -o fortranposix.lo gcc-4.0 -O2 -Wall -fPIC -c posixwrapper.c -o posixwrapper.lo gfortran-4.0 -o libfortranposix.so.0.0.0 -shared -Wl,-soname="libfortranposix.so.0" fortranposix.lo posixwrapper.lo gfortran-4.0 -O2 -Wall -c fortranposix.f90 -o fortranposix.o gcc-4.0 -O2 -Wall -c posixwrapper.c -o posixwrapper.o ar crus libfortranposix.a fortranposix.o posixwrapper.o rm -f *.lo rm -f *.o make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/rajulocal/practice/fortranposix-0.1' touch build-stamp fakeroot debian/rules binary dh_testdir dh_testroot dh_clean -k dh_installdirs # Add here commands to install the package into debian/tmp /usr/bin/make install DESTDIR=/home/rajulocal/practice/fortran
Re: library files are not included in the .deb files
kamaraju kusumanchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > $tree fortranposix-0.1/debian/tmp/ > fortranposix-0.1/debian/tmp/ > `-- usr > `-- lib > |-- libfortranposix.a > `-- libfortranposix.so.0.0.0 > > 2 directories, 2 files It seems you are using a debhelper compatibility level (see debhelper(1)) strictly greater than 1, which is good. In this case, you should install your stuff into debian/ instead of debian/tmp if you want it to end up in a package. Didn't you wonder why your .deb file contained quite a few files that your build procedure does *not* put in debian/tmp? -- Florent -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: library files are not included in the .deb files
On Sat, Jul 09, 2005 at 02:13:58PM -0400, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote:
> I am trying to package a library whose upstream is located at
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/fortranposix
>
>
> I already read the libpkg-guide, maint-guide. This problem was not
> discussed in any of them. I googled and also asked in the irc about this
> problem.
>
> There were no errors/warnings when I checked the final packages with
> linda -i and lintian -i. But when I did dpkg -c, there are no libraries
> in the packages.
maybe it's just something wrong within your
debian/.{install,dirs,whatever} files (if you're using
debhelper scripts
[...]
> $dpkg -c libfortranposix0-dev_0.1-1_i386.deb
> drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2005-07-09 13:46:00 ./
> drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2005-07-09 13:46:00 ./usr/
> drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2005-07-09 13:45:59 ./usr/bin/
> drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2005-07-09 13:45:59 ./usr/sbin/
/usr/sbin and /usr/sbin are useless, don't create them. They look like
the default entries for the dirs file created by dh_make :)
[...]
> make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/rajulocal/practice/fortranposix-0.1'
> dh_testdir
> dh_testroot
> dh_installchangelogs CHANGES
> dh_installdocs
> dh_installexamples
> dh_installman
> dh_link
> dh_strip
> dh_compress
> dh_fixperms
> dh_installdeb
> dh_shlibdeps
> dh_gencontrol
> dpkg-gencontrol: warning: unknown substitution variable ${shlibs:Depends}
> dpkg-gencontrol: warning: unknown substitution variable ${misc:Depends}
> dh_md5sums
> dh_builddeb
> dpkg-deb: building package `libfortranposix0-dev' in
> `../libfortranposix0-dev_0.1-1_i386.deb'.
> dpkg-deb: building package `libfortranposix0' in
> `../libfortranposix0_0.1-1_i386.deb'.
> signfile fortranposix_0.1-1.dsc
can't see dh_install in the above list, might be the problem?
Could you eventually put your debian/* scrips somewhere to give them a
look?
--
mattia
:wq!
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: library files are not included in the .deb files
Mattia Dongili wrote:
On Sat, Jul 09, 2005 at 02:13:58PM -0400, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote:
I am trying to package a library whose upstream is located at
http://sourceforge.net/projects/fortranposix
I already read the libpkg-guide, maint-guide. This problem was not
discussed in any of them. I googled and also asked in the irc about this
problem.
There were no errors/warnings when I checked the final packages with
linda -i and lintian -i. But when I did dpkg -c, there are no libraries
in the packages.
maybe it's just something wrong within your
debian/.{install,dirs,whatever} files (if you're using
debhelper scripts
[...]
$dpkg -c libfortranposix0-dev_0.1-1_i386.deb
drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2005-07-09 13:46:00 ./
drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2005-07-09 13:46:00 ./usr/
drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2005-07-09 13:45:59 ./usr/bin/
drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2005-07-09 13:45:59 ./usr/sbin/
/usr/sbin and /usr/sbin are useless, don't create them. They look like
the default entries for the dirs file created by dh_make :)
done.
[...]
make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/rajulocal/practice/fortranposix-0.1'
dh_testdir
dh_testroot
dh_installchangelogs CHANGES
dh_installdocs
dh_installexamples
dh_installman
dh_link
dh_strip
dh_compress
dh_fixperms
dh_installdeb
dh_shlibdeps
dh_gencontrol
dpkg-gencontrol: warning: unknown substitution variable ${shlibs:Depends}
dpkg-gencontrol: warning: unknown substitution variable ${misc:Depends}
dh_md5sums
dh_builddeb
dpkg-deb: building package `libfortranposix0-dev' in
`../libfortranposix0-dev_0.1-1_i386.deb'.
dpkg-deb: building package `libfortranposix0' in
`../libfortranposix0_0.1-1_i386.deb'.
signfile fortranposix_0.1-1.dsc
can't see dh_install in the above list, might be the problem?
Could you eventually put your debian/* scrips somewhere to give them a
look?
I have added dh_install in the binary-arch: stanza of the rules files.
Still the library files are not included in the .deb files. The new
build.log can be found at
http://24.58.7.0/debian-mentors/fortranposix-0.1/build.log
Is there any website where I can upload the debian directory? For now, I
have set up a web server on my laptop and all the relevent files can be
found at
http://24.58.7.0/debian-mentors/
If there is any public website where I can upload this stuff that would
be great.
thanks
raju
--
Kamaraju S Kusumanchi
Graduate Student, MAE
Cornell University
http://www.people.cornell.edu/pages/kk288/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
