RFS: daisy-player (next try, new upstream version)

[Paul Gevers]

Dear mentors and accessibility list,

[Sorry for the long mail, but I try to motivate possible sponsors with
full information.]

I am still looking for a reviewer and/or sponsor for my package
"daisy-player" targeted at experimental. Daisy-player is a command-line
player for talking books based on the Digital Accessible Information
System protocol (currently only version 2 is supported). It is
comparable in functionality, features, and ease of use with commercial
players, and has a simple user interface appropriate for Braille
terminals. Upstream agreed to try to also support DAISY version 3 in the
future.

Upstream is actively implementing improvements suggested by me and an
active user of my Private Package Archive, so a new version is
available. For testing purposes, the DAISY Consortium maintains a set of
sample files at [1]. I joined the accessibility team and maintain the
packaging in that teams git repository [links below], but as far as I
can tell possible uploaders there are busy with the upcoming Debian
release, so I ask mentors as well.

Changes with respect to previous upload to mentors and git@alioth:
  * New upstream release
+ Renewed man-page patch and removed deprecated patch for iso9660
+ Updated dependencies
+ Upstream now supports translations
+ Build language files
+ Upstream switch to libncursesw5 for utf-8 support of translations
+ Added patch to really include ncurses from libncursesw5
+ Updated copyright file (year and info)
  * Improved debian/daisy-player.desktop with German translation

* Package name: daisy-player
  Version : 5.5.0-1
  Upstream Author : Jos Lemmens 
* URL : http://web.inter.nl.net/users/lemmensj/
* License : GPL-2
(actually, the program is GPL-2+, but it's icon is
only GPL-2)
  Section : sound

It builds these binary packages:
daisy-player - player for DAISY Digital Talking Books
daisy-player-dbg - daisy-player debugging symbols

The package appears to be lintian clean.

The upload would fix these bugs: 595292 (ITP)

My motivation for maintaining this package is that I got touched by a
question from Dirk Schouten on the Dutch debian users e-mail list on how
he should build a daisy player (player for audio books) for Linux as his
eyesight was waning. Together with some more people on that list we
figured out that most projects available seemed abandoned. But we found
daisy-player, which is programmed by blind Jos Lemmens, and it actually
works pretty well. Together with Jos and Dirk we improved the package to
get it in shape for Debian, because there were some choices made which
were not suitable for Debian at the beginning. I think we are finally
there. My packaging is already included in Vinux (a Ubuntu derivative
for visually impaired users) and the maintainers of Knoppix are also
interested.

Known issues (comments welcome):
- I have asked upstream to add license and copyright notices to the
translation files.
- I have asked upstream to move the .daisy-player.rc file to the already
existing .daisy-player directory.
- Upstream ships the icons in a zipped tar file. Should I ask him to
ship them directly (in a sub-directory for instance) or is unzipping at
build time also fine?
- Get an agreement with upstream on the description of daisy-player in
the desktop and manual file.

The package can be found on mentors.debian.net and on Alioth:
-Mentors:
  - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/d/daisy-player
  - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable
main contrib non-free
  - dget
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/d/daisy-player/daisy-player_5.5.0-1.dsc
- GIT:
  - git://git.debian.org/pkg-a11y/daisy-player.git
  - git+ssh://git.debian.org/git/pkg-a11y/daisy-player.git
  - https://alioth.debian.org/anonscm/git/pkg-a11y/daisy-player.git

I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me.

Kind regards
 Paul Gevers

[1] http://www.daisy.org/samples



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: RFS: libzeep

[Maarten L. Hekkelman]

Hey Niels,

On 15-01-11 23:13, Niels Thykier wrote:


Right, you do not have to paste its contents in twice.  You can say
something like:

"Distributed under the Boost Software License, Version 1.0.
  See the full text of the license above/below"


fixed that.


Also, the license file is still installed in the -dev package.  (see
debian/docs).  In general, when you have multiple binary packages (like
this case), you should use debian/.docs (etc.) instead of
debian/docs


Ah... yes. I've changed this, the README is now installed by the -dev 
package only and the LICENSE is not installed any more.


I also upgraded the copyright file to dep5 format.


It would also be cool if the build supported the CFLAGS/LDFLAGS set by
dpkg-buildpackage/dpkg-buildflags.  This would allow derivatives and
users to rebuild the package with different standard flags.  A notable
example here is Ubuntu, which is currently linking with --no-add-needed
and --as-needed.
   I messed around a bit and the library appears to build just fine with
- --no-add-needed (and --no-undefined), so it appears to be properly linked.


Well... that took a bit more work than I expected. Mainly because I had 
to find out how the dpkg-buildflags tool works and what the format of 
the buildflags.conf file is supposed to be. Eventually found out by 
looking at the Perl code. Maybe a man page for the file format could be 
added.


Anyway, I added support for build-flags. But I used the CFLAGS variable 
and not the CXXFLAGS one even though my code is C++ only. I'm not sure 
if this is a problem. The reason I did this is that I guess most people 
will set CFLAGS and forget about the existence of CXXFLAGS.


I hope I'm getting close now?

Best regards,

-maarten hekkelman


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4d330254.6090...@cmbi.ru.nl

Re: RFS: roxterm (updated package for experimental)

[Tony Houghton]

On 15/01/11 16:51, Kan-Ru Chen wrote:

Tony Houghton  writes:


On 15/01/11 08:26, Kan-Ru Chen wrote:

OK. When I was doing the final test, roxterm existed immediately after
launch. 1.18.5-3, however, has no such problem. I suspect it's only my
environment, x86_64-linux-gnu. Do you have any clue?


Can you rebuild it without the debugging symbols being stripped and get
a backtrace?


I tried. Not very useful, the backtrace only shows a "child-exited"
signal from somewhere.


Please use the attached patch so we can see what command it's trying to
run. Does it make a difference if you use a custom command or change the
"Login shell" option? And in case you're not using standard Debian
libvte packages let me know, because roxterm uses a different fork 
command with 0.26 or newer.


diff --git a/src/roxterm.c b/src/roxterm.c
index 469d9df..3324d36 100644
--- a/src/roxterm.c
+++ b/src/roxterm.c
@@ -552,6 +552,9 @@ static char *roxterm_fork_command(VteTerminal *terminal,
 const char *working_directory,
 gboolean lastlog, gboolean utmp, gboolean wtmp, pid_t *pid)
 {
+char *avs = g_strjoinv(" ", argv);
+g_debug("command: %s, argv: %s", command, avs);
+g_free(avs);
 #if HAVE_VTE_TERMINAL_FORK_COMMAND_FULL
 GPid *ppid = (GPid *) pid;
 GError *error = NULL;

Re: Conf files and static files in a deb package

[Raphael Hertzog]

Hi,

On Sun, 16 Jan 2011, pablo platt wrote:
> I'm using dh_help to build a package template and trying to follow the
> debian packaging guide for creating a binary package.

Please ask your packaging questions on debian-mentors@lists.debian.org.
This list is for developing dpkg.

Just a quick hint for you though:
> How do I tell debuild which file is a conf file and should go for example to
> /etc/mypkg.conf ?
[...]
> I also don't understand how to include static files in the package.

man dh_install

Cheers,
-- 
Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer

Follow my Debian News ▶ http://RaphaelHertzog.com (English)
  ▶ http://RaphaelHertzog.fr (Français)


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110116163510.ge17...@rivendell.home.ouaza.com

RFS: hugs98 (NMU, RC bugfix)

[Felix Geyer]

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for my NMU of the package "hugs98".

The upload would fix this RC bug: http://bugs.debian.org/608220

The package can be found on mentors.debian.net:
- URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/h/hugs98
- Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable
main contrib non-free
- dget
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/h/hugs98/hugs98_98.200609.21-5.2.dsc

I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me.

Kind regards
Felix Geyer


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4d3325fd.7010...@fobos.de

Re: RFS: openteacher

[Andreas Tille]

Hi Arvind,

On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 10:09:43PM +0530, Arvind S Raj wrote:
> - dget
> http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/o/openteacher/openteacher_2.0beta2-1.dsc

as promised if nobody from Debian Edu has a look into your package (it's
a shame that nobody did) I now come up with some remarks:

debian/control:
 - Standards-Version: 3.8.4
-> current is 3.9.1
 - #Vcs-*
-> any reason why not just injecting the package to Vcs?  I'm in
   big favour of using team maintenance and thus I would really like
   you to use the Vcs and set the Tags accordingly
 - long description: Please do not add newlines
   inbetween each single item, using two spaces in the beginning of a
   line is sufficient to get the wanted pacing.  It might disturb the
   rendering in some applications
debian/rules
  PLease replace the comment from the template
  in the beginning by something that makes sense

debian/watch: missing

debian/opentecher.1: Manpage needs to be installed

Thanks for packaging openteacher

   Andreas.

-- 
http://fam-tille.de


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110116182245.ga18...@an3as.eu

Re: RFS: logtop a realtime log line rate analyzer

[Julien Palard]

Hi Salvatore,

I just took some time to work on it, 16 days without any seconds
before today ... here it is :

On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 3:09 PM, Salvatore Bonaccorso  wrote:
> I was wondering if you could release it as logtop-$version.tar.gz
> upstream, instead of $version.tar.gz.

Ok, i understand, done.

> So it seems, did you added the CHANGELOG afterwards to upstream's tarball? 
> And there are also the .pc directories which should not be therein.

Hum I have to put the changlog in the git repository ? It's a bit
tricky as git have its own changelog system to maintain a manual
changelog file in it ? Whatever, it's done, and i removed the .po in
the tarball.

> lintian --pedantic -v -iI --display-experimental --show-overrides --checksums 
> --color auto

Checked and passed successfully !

-- 
Julien Palard - CTO à Eeple - 
Mobile : +33 (0)6 21 19 49 10
Office :  +33 (0)1 83 62 00 85
http://www.eeple.fr


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/aanlktikb_fycaeoj8-en6ixksjiubsma6csuh_7mm...@mail.gmail.com

RFS: snake4 (updated package)

[michael]

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 1.0.12-12
of my package "snake4".

It builds these binary packages:
snake4 - Snake game

The upload would fix these bugs: 581387 (O: snake4 -- Snake game)

This is just for adopting the package.
I know that the package is not lintian clean - I will do that next, but because 
I'm asolutely new
in maintaining Debian I want to do one step after another. I hope there`s 
someone to help me
anyway...

The package can be found on mentors.debian.net:
- URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/snake4
- Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main 
contrib non-free
- dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/snake4/snake4_1.0.12-12.dsc

I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me.

Kind regards
 Michael Boegl


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1295210005.3057.6.camel@sirius

RFS: runit

[Jonathan Nieder]

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 2.1.1-6.2 of the
package "runit".

It builds these binary packages:
runit  - system-wide service supervision

The upload would fix these bugs: 605912

That is, it allows upgrading from the package in lenny.

The package can be found on mentors.debian.net:
- URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/r/runit
- Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main 
contrib non-free
- dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/r/runit/runit_2.1.1-6.2.dsc

I would be glad if someone has time to look it over and upload it.

Regards,
Jonathan


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110116204644.GC26227@burratino

In search of a new sponsor and mentor

[Chris Carr]

Hi all,

My name is Chris Carr, and I took over as maintainer of the package
angband, by agreement with the previous maintainer, in early 2009. He
kindly mentored me for over a year through two releases, but we lost
touch after he moved jobs last spring.

There is a new, stable upstream release of Angband - 3.2.0 - which I
have packaged for Debian:

http://www.terminalarrogance.com/angband_3.2.0-1_i386.deb
http://www.terminalarrogance.com/angband_3.2.0-1_i386.changes
http://www.terminalarrogance.com/angband_3.2.0-1.diff.gz
http://www.terminalarrogance.com/angband_3.2.0-1.dsc

The orig.tar.gz is at
http://rephial.org/downloads/3.2/angband-3.2.0.tar.gz. The package is
lintian-clean, except for one warning about >50% arch-independent data.
I'm happy to split it into two packages, but don't know how to build two
binary packages from a single source package. If someone can point me
towards a package which does this using Manoj's scripts, I'll work it
out. The package installs, upgrades and purges with no problems. The
master upstream repo is http://github.com/angband/angband, and the
packaging repo is git://git.debian.org/git/collab-maint/angband.git

I've also packaged the sounds in a new non-free angband-audio package
(ITP #576029):

http://www.terminalarrogance.com/angband-audio_3.1.0-1_all.deb
http://www.terminalarrogance.com/angband-audio_3.1.0-1_i386.changes
http://www.terminalarrogance.com/angband-audio_3.1.0-1.diff.gz
http://www.terminalarrogance.com/angband-audio_3.1.0-1.dsc

The orig.tar.gz is at http://www.dubtrain.com/angband/dasp_v31.zip, but
I had to convert them to oggs to work properly with the SDL mixer used
by angband, so I made a new orig.tar.gz at:

http://www.terminalarrogance.com/angband-audio_3.1.0.orig.tar.gz

This works fine for the build (again, it's lintian-clean), but I'm a
little fuzzy on whether this is the right thing to do to the
orig.tar.gz file. If I try to package oggs against the original zip
file of wavs, I get "unrepresentable changes to source". The package
installs with no problems. There is one minor bug on removal which I'd
like some help with (reinstating a config file from the angband
package). I have created a repo at
git://git.debian.org/git/collab-maint/angband-audio.git

I also aspire to maintain angband-doc if Manoj agrees, and to package
one or more angband variants. I'd be most grateful if someone with spare
mentoring capacity wished to get in touch. I am not averse to learning
new packaging methods if necessary.

Regards,

CC 


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1295210182.2595.3.camel@junior.sadnet

Re: RFS: hugs98 (NMU, RC bugfix)

[David Bremner]

On Sun, 16 Jan 2011 18:08:13 +0100, Felix Geyer  wrote:
> I am looking for a sponsor for my NMU of the package "hugs98".
> 
> The upload would fix this RC bug: http://bugs.debian.org/608220

> http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/h/hugs98/hugs98_98.200609.21-5.2.dsc
> 

Hi Felix;

Please discuss with the release team (in CC) whether your upload is OK
for squeeze. If they approve it I (or someone else) can sponsor the NMU.

Release team: diffstat is big because autoconf rewrites all of 
configure. Other than that, the interesting change is 

--- hugs98-98.200609.21/debian/rules
+++ hugs98-98.200609.21/debian/rules
@@ -18,6 +18,9 @@
 # This has to be exported to make some magic below work.
 export DH_OPTIONS
 
+# Ensure that LDFLAGS is empty as the build system can't handle commas.
+LDFLAGS :=
+
 CONFIG_DIRS := . packages/network/ packages/Cabal/tests/HSQL/ \
packages/ALUT/ packages/GLUT/ packages/OpenAL/ \
packages/OpenGL/ src/unix/ 


d


pgpzOy11LvLSO.pgp
Description: PGP signature

RFS: aescrypt

[mezgani ali]

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for my package "aescrypt".

* Package name: aescrypt
  Version : 3.05-1
  Upstream Author : Glenn Washburn , Paul E.
Jones , Mauro Gilardi 
* URL :  http://www.aescrypt.com/
* License : gpl
  Section : utils

It builds these binary packages:
aescrypt   - Using a powerful 256-bit encryption algorithm,

The package appears to be lintian clean.

The upload would fix these bugs: 609505

My motivation for maintaining this package is: [fill in].

The package can be found on mentors.debian.net:
- URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/a/aescrypt
- Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable
main contrib non-free
- dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/a/aescrypt/aescrypt_3.05-1.dsc

I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me.

Kind regards
 Ali MEZGANI

RFS: python-akismet

[mezgani ali]

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for my package "python-akismet".

* Package name: python-akismet
  Version : 0.2.0-1
  Upstream Author : Michael Foord ]
* URL : http://www.voidspace.org.uk/python/modules.shtml#akismet
* License : gpl
  Section : python

It builds these binary packages:
python-akismet - interface to the Akismet anti comment-spam API

The package appears to be lintian clean.

The upload would fix these bugs: 537796

My motivation for maintaining this package is: [fill in].

The package can be found on mentors.debian.net:
- URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/python-akismet
- Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable
main contrib non-free
- dget 
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/python-akismet/python-akismet_0.2.0-1.dsc

I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me.

Kind regards
 Ali MEZGANI

Re: RFS: hugs98 (NMU, RC bugfix)

[Julien Cristau]

On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 16:19:11 -0400, David Bremner wrote:

> On Sun, 16 Jan 2011 18:08:13 +0100, Felix Geyer  wrote:
> > I am looking for a sponsor for my NMU of the package "hugs98".
> > 
> > The upload would fix this RC bug: http://bugs.debian.org/608220
> 
> > http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/h/hugs98/hugs98_98.200609.21-5.2.dsc
> > 
> 
> Hi Felix;
> 
> Please discuss with the release team (in CC) whether your upload is OK
> for squeeze. If they approve it I (or someone else) can sponsor the NMU.
> 
> Release team: diffstat is big because autoconf rewrites all of 
> configure. Other than that, the interesting change is 
> 
> --- hugs98-98.200609.21/debian/rules
> +++ hugs98-98.200609.21/debian/rules
> @@ -18,6 +18,9 @@
>  # This has to be exported to make some magic below work.
>  export DH_OPTIONS
>  
> +# Ensure that LDFLAGS is empty as the build system can't handle commas.
> +LDFLAGS :=
> +
>  CONFIG_DIRS := . packages/network/ packages/Cabal/tests/HSQL/ \
>   packages/ALUT/ packages/GLUT/ packages/OpenAL/ \
>   packages/OpenGL/ src/unix/ 
> 
> 
That doesn't seem to be the interesting change.  Debian's
dpkg-buildpackage doesn't set LDFLAGS.  Also, why wasn't this sent to
the bug?

Cheers,
Julien


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

RFS: marave

[Gildardo Adrian Maravilla Jacome]

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for my package "marave".

* Package name: marave
  Version : 0.7-1
* URL : http://code.google.com/p/marave/
* License : gplV2+
  Section : editors

It builds these binary packages:
marave - Full screen editor written on Python

The package appears to be lintian clean.

The upload would fix these bugs: 592572

The package can be found on mentors.debian.net:
- URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/marave
- Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable
main contrib non-free
- dget
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/marave/marave_0.7-1.dsc

I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me.

Kind regards
 fulapol


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: RFS: runit

[gregor herrmann]

On Sun, 16 Jan 2011 14:46:44 -0600, Jonathan Nieder wrote:

> I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 2.1.1-6.2 of the
> package "runit".

Uploaded, thanks for your work!


Cheers,
gregor
 
-- 
 .''`.   http://info.comodo.priv.at/ -- GPG key IDs: 0x8649AA06, 0x00F3CFE4
 : :' :  Debian GNU/Linux user, admin, & developer - http://www.debian.org/
 `. `'   Member of VIBE!AT & SPI, fellow of Free Software Foundation Europe
   `-NP: Tom Waits: Flower's Grave


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: RFS: hugs98 (NMU, RC bugfix)

[Felix Geyer]

On 16.01.2011 22:12, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 16:19:11 -0400, David Bremner wrote:
>
>> Hi Felix;
>>
>> Please discuss with the release team (in CC) whether your upload is OK
>> for squeeze. If they approve it I (or someone else) can sponsor the NMU.
>>
>> Release team: diffstat is big because autoconf rewrites all of 
>> configure. Other than that, the interesting change is 
>>
>> --- hugs98-98.200609.21/debian/rules
>> +++ hugs98-98.200609.21/debian/rules
>> @@ -18,6 +18,9 @@
>>  # This has to be exported to make some magic below work.
>>  export DH_OPTIONS
>>  
>> +# Ensure that LDFLAGS is empty as the build system can't handle commas.
>> +LDFLAGS :=
>> +
>>  CONFIG_DIRS := . packages/network/ packages/Cabal/tests/HSQL/ \
>>  packages/ALUT/ packages/GLUT/ packages/OpenAL/ \
>>  packages/OpenGL/ src/unix/ 
>>
>>
> That doesn't seem to be the interesting change.  Debian's
> dpkg-buildpackage doesn't set LDFLAGS.  Also, why wasn't this sent to
> the bug?
>
> Cheers,
> Julien
I've upload a new version to Debian Mentors without the LDFLAGS change
and CCed the bug.

Felix


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4d3373eb.9090...@fobos.de

Re: Bug#608220: RFS: hugs98 (NMU, RC bugfix)

[Julien Cristau]

On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 23:40:43 +0100, Felix Geyer wrote:

> I've upload a new version to Debian Mentors without the LDFLAGS change
> and CCed the bug.
> 
Well you've still not sent a patch to the bug, afaict.

Cheers,
Julien


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: RFS: aescrypt

[Jonathan Wiltshire]

Hi,

I'm not in a position to sponsor your package, but I started reviewing it
and found several problems:

On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 09:08:28PM +, mezgani ali wrote:
> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "aescrypt".
> 
> * Package name: aescrypt
>   Version : 3.05-1
>   Upstream Author : Glenn Washburn , Paul E.
> Jones , Mauro Gilardi 
> * URL :  http://www.aescrypt.com/
> * License : gpl
>   Section : utils
> 
> It builds these binary packages:
> aescrypt   - Using a powerful 256-bit encryption algorithm,

This isn't a suitable short description, and the long description gives no
indication why I would want to use it. See the developer's reference for
short description tips.

> The package appears to be lintian clean.

I doubt this, but I couldn't even build it to check:

| make[1]: Entering directory `/tmp/aescrypt-3.05'
| gcc -Wall -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -c aescrypt.c
| gcc -Wall -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -c aes.c
| gcc -Wall -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -c sha256.c
| gcc -Wall -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -c password.c
| gcc -Wall -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64  -o aescrypt aescrypt.o aes.o sha256.o 
password.o
| install -o root -g root -m 755 aescrypt /usr/bin
| install: cannot create regular file `/usr/bin/aescrypt': Permission denied
| make[1]: *** [install] Error 1

That implies that you've been building as root - the autobuild network
doesn't, so you need to check for this. You should also use 'dpkg -c *.deb'
to check the package contains the files you expect; in this case, it
wouldn't have had the binary in.

The watch file also fails:

|-- Found watchfile in ./debian
|-- In debian/watch, processing watchfile line:
|  http://www.aescrypt.com/cgi-bin/download?file=v3/aescrypt(.*)_source\.tar\.gz
| uscan debug: requesting URL http://www.aescrypt.com/cgi-bin/download?file=v3/

| uscan warning: In debian/watch,
|  no matching hrefs for watch line
|  http://www.aescrypt.com/cgi-bin/download?file=v3/aescrypt(.*)_source\.tar\.gz

There's some trailing whitespace in debian/control, and as above you need
to improve the short and long descriptions.

The source files that have license grants at the top mention GPL2+, not
GPL3+ as in your copyright file.

The clean target does not remove debian/aescrypt.debhelper.log, so that
file got included in your diff. The file debian/files is empty, get rid of
it.

README.Debian and README.source are also useless. A user looking in
/usr/share/doc/aescrypt for those files will see Readme.txt right alongside
them, so remove the extra step and leave it at that.

debian/rules includes lots of unneccessary calls and some lines are just
commented out, so they can be removed to make it easier to read. It looks
like it's just been copied from echoping:

  # Add here commands to install the package into debian/echoping.

You can't pass DESTDIR into the upstream make file, because it never uses
it - you'll have to persuade upstream to fix the makefile or patch it not
to install files to /usr/bin. From the look of your debian/rules, you can
probably use the small or tiny form for debhelper, which gets rid of almost
all the clutter.

After fixing the build system lintian has these pointers:

I: aescrypt: extended-description-is-probably-too-short
W: aescrypt: binary-without-manpage usr/bin/aescrypt
P: aescrypt: no-upstream-changelog
E: aescrypt: debian-changelog-file-missing
E: aescrypt: unstripped-binary-or-object ./usr/bin/aescrypt

The last three are because of missing debhelper calls, they should be easily
fixed.

That should give you something to be getting on with :)


-- 
Jonathan Wiltshire  j...@debian.org
Debian Developer http://people.debian.org/~jmw

4096R: 0xD3524C51 / 0A55 B7C5 1223 3942 86EC  74C3 5394 479D D352 4C51


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: RFS: aescrypt

[mezgani ali]

Hi Jonathan,

I thank you first for your suggestions, well i fixed most of them and here i
have some questions

On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 12:05 AM, Jonathan Wiltshire  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I'm not in a position to sponsor your package, but I started reviewing it
> and found several problems:
>
> On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 09:08:28PM +, mezgani ali wrote:
> > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "aescrypt".
> >
> > * Package name: aescrypt
> >   Version : 3.05-1
> >   Upstream Author : Glenn Washburn , Paul E.
> > Jones , Mauro Gilardi 
> > * URL :  http://www.aescrypt.com/
> > * License : gpl
> >   Section : utils
> >
> > It builds these binary packages:
> > aescrypt   - Using a powerful 256-bit encryption algorithm,
>
> This isn't a suitable short description, and the long description gives no
> indication why I would want to use it. See the developer's reference for
> short description tips.
>
> > The package appears to be lintian clean.
>
> I doubt this, but I couldn't even build it to check:
>
> | make[1]: Entering directory `/tmp/aescrypt-3.05'
> | gcc -Wall -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -c aescrypt.c
> | gcc -Wall -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -c aes.c
> | gcc -Wall -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -c sha256.c
> | gcc -Wall -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -c password.c
> | gcc -Wall -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64  -o aescrypt aescrypt.o aes.o sha256.o
> password.o
> | install -o root -g root -m 755 aescrypt /usr/bin
> | install: cannot create regular file `/usr/bin/aescrypt': Permission
> denied
> | make[1]: *** [install] Error 1
>
> That implies that you've been building as root - the autobuild network
> doesn't, so you need to check for this. You should also use 'dpkg -c *.deb'
> to check the package contains the files you expect; in this case, it
> wouldn't have had the binary in.
>
> The watch file also fails:
>
> May a package contain obligatory  a watch file ?


> |-- Found watchfile in ./debian
> |-- In debian/watch, processing watchfile line:
> |
> http://www.aescrypt.com/cgi-bin/download?file=v3/aescrypt(.*)_source\.tar\.gz
> | uscan debug: requesting URL
> http://www.aescrypt.com/cgi-bin/download?file=v3/
> 
> | uscan warning: In debian/watch,
> |  no matching hrefs for watch line
> |
> http://www.aescrypt.com/cgi-bin/download?file=v3/aescrypt(.*)_source\.tar\.gz
>
> There's some trailing whitespace in debian/control, and as above you need
> to improve the short and long descriptions.
>
> Fixed


> The source files that have license grants at the top mention GPL2+, not
> GPL3+ as in your copyright file.
>
> Fixed


> The clean target does not remove debian/aescrypt.debhelper.log, so that
> file got included in your diff. The file debian/files is empty, get rid of
> it.
>
> Fixed


> README.Debian and README.source are also useless. A user looking in
> /usr/share/doc/aescrypt for those files will see Readme.txt right alongside
> them, so remove the extra step and leave it at that.


May i remove them or maybe append the content of Readme.txt file


> debian/rules includes lots of unneccessary calls and some lines are just
> commented out, so they can be removed to make it easier to read. It looks
> like it's just been copied from echoping:
>
> Fixed

>  # Add here commands to install the package into debian/echoping.
>
> You can't pass DESTDIR into the upstream make file, because it never uses
> it - you'll have to persuade upstream to fix the makefile or patch it not
> to install files to /usr/bin. From the look of your debian/rules, you can
> probably use the small or tiny form for debhelper, which gets rid of almost
> all the clutter.
>
> After fixing the build system lintian has these pointers:
>
> I: aescrypt: extended-description-is-probably-too-short
> W: aescrypt: binary-without-manpage usr/bin/aescrypt
>
P: aescrypt: no-upstream-changelog
> E: aescrypt: debian-changelog-file-missing
> E: aescrypt: unstripped-binary-or-object ./usr/bin/aescrypt
>
> The last three are because of missing debhelper calls, they should be
> easily
> fixed.
>
>
>
> --
> Jonathan Wiltshire  j...@debian.org
> Debian Developer 
> http://people.debian.org/~jmw
>
> 4096R: 0xD3524C51 / 0A55 B7C5 1223 3942 86EC  74C3 5394 479D D352 4C51
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJNM4fAAAoJEFOUR53TUkxROSUP/1dKuygF0/2r4bZP6quBMElq
> +q4k8c2KxgmDhFvy99EyO11Go2H+mg5kdnYIUcc+ZnNYmEjCzbxbWeUaFdLoFa0b
> uHVY1lslbt1Eq6fTAft0TuXc3kmwCNIquRKxC8G+vK3KD4oofgZ/H7RkhCGwJ2gJ
> A/XW9X8fhcdmnf/dDHXFJcIVGkzz8CgI+N8ghvkRJYX9kbYENQpvyNfutFx5tsH4
> QeunRqFv1QCtObZ5HhH4eMcZIjT0qT/HFgXrwjsjQR95UkdkEzUiqNKs3uQGwMJe
> QtATS82VVUJJMlF6lyhybFQtkkMDx9vIgpks/ACQNVFdMEjNVORYIO/L1QdW2Xds
> 5jsnEPvkJTONJAvnd/V197lm6O7t4ytAu7fXws8A78a

Re: Bug#608220: RFS: hugs98 (NMU, RC bugfix)

[Cyril Brulebois]

Felix Geyer  (17/01/2011):
> I didn't realize that you were talking about the patch itself.
> Attaching it now.

Thanks, sponsored. Thanks for spotting I failed to get it fixed in the
first place, too.

KiBi.


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: RFS: aescrypt

[Fernando Mercês]

Ali,

I'm not a mentor, but I believe that your questions can be answered by
entire reading this article: http://people.debian.org/~codehelp/

Best regards,

@Fernando Mercês Linux Registered User
#432779
www.mentebinaria.com.br
http://linuxreversing.org
http://softwarelivre-rj.org
--
Participe do I Hack'n Rio , dias 8 e 9 de abril na
UFRJ!
--



On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 11:01 PM, mezgani ali  wrote:

> Hi Jonathan,
>
> I thank you first for your suggestions, well i fixed most of them and here
> i have some questions
>
> On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 12:05 AM, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm not in a position to sponsor your package, but I started reviewing it
>> and found several problems:
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 09:08:28PM +, mezgani ali wrote:
>> > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "aescrypt".
>> >
>> > * Package name: aescrypt
>> >   Version : 3.05-1
>> >   Upstream Author : Glenn Washburn , Paul E.
>> > Jones , Mauro Gilardi 
>> > * URL :  http://www.aescrypt.com/
>> > * License : gpl
>> >   Section : utils
>> >
>> > It builds these binary packages:
>> > aescrypt   - Using a powerful 256-bit encryption algorithm,
>>
>> This isn't a suitable short description, and the long description gives no
>> indication why I would want to use it. See the developer's reference for
>> short description tips.
>>
>> > The package appears to be lintian clean.
>>
>> I doubt this, but I couldn't even build it to check:
>>
>> | make[1]: Entering directory `/tmp/aescrypt-3.05'
>> | gcc -Wall -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -c aescrypt.c
>> | gcc -Wall -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -c aes.c
>> | gcc -Wall -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -c sha256.c
>> | gcc -Wall -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -c password.c
>> | gcc -Wall -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64  -o aescrypt aescrypt.o aes.o sha256.o
>> password.o
>> | install -o root -g root -m 755 aescrypt /usr/bin
>> | install: cannot create regular file `/usr/bin/aescrypt': Permission
>> denied
>> | make[1]: *** [install] Error 1
>>
>> That implies that you've been building as root - the autobuild network
>> doesn't, so you need to check for this. You should also use 'dpkg -c
>> *.deb'
>> to check the package contains the files you expect; in this case, it
>> wouldn't have had the binary in.
>>
>> The watch file also fails:
>>
>> May a package contain obligatory  a watch file ?
>
>
>> |-- Found watchfile in ./debian
>> |-- In debian/watch, processing watchfile line:
>> |
>> http://www.aescrypt.com/cgi-bin/download?file=v3/aescrypt(.*)_source\.tar\.gz
>> | uscan debug: requesting URL
>> http://www.aescrypt.com/cgi-bin/download?file=v3/
>> 
>> | uscan warning: In debian/watch,
>> |  no matching hrefs for watch line
>> |
>> http://www.aescrypt.com/cgi-bin/download?file=v3/aescrypt(.*)_source\.tar\.gz
>>
>> There's some trailing whitespace in debian/control, and as above you need
>> to improve the short and long descriptions.
>>
>> Fixed
>
>
>> The source files that have license grants at the top mention GPL2+, not
>> GPL3+ as in your copyright file.
>>
>> Fixed
>
>
>> The clean target does not remove debian/aescrypt.debhelper.log, so that
>> file got included in your diff. The file debian/files is empty, get rid of
>> it.
>>
>> Fixed
>
>
>> README.Debian and README.source are also useless. A user looking in
>> /usr/share/doc/aescrypt for those files will see Readme.txt right
>> alongside
>> them, so remove the extra step and leave it at that.
>
>
> May i remove them or maybe append the content of Readme.txt file
>
>
>> debian/rules includes lots of unneccessary calls and some lines are just
>> commented out, so they can be removed to make it easier to read. It looks
>> like it's just been copied from echoping:
>>
>> Fixed
>
>>  # Add here commands to install the package into debian/echoping.
>>
>> You can't pass DESTDIR into the upstream make file, because it never uses
>> it - you'll have to persuade upstream to fix the makefile or patch it not
>> to install files to /usr/bin. From the look of your debian/rules, you can
>> probably use the small or tiny form for debhelper, which gets rid of
>> almost
>> all the clutter.
>>
>> After fixing the build system lintian has these pointers:
>>
>> I: aescrypt: extended-description-is-probably-too-short
>> W: aescrypt: binary-without-manpage usr/bin/aescrypt
>>
> P: aescrypt: no-upstream-changelog
>> E: aescrypt: debian-changelog-file-missing
>> E: aescrypt: unstripped-binary-or-object ./usr/bin/aescrypt
>>
>> The last three are because of missing debhelper calls, they should be
>> easily
>> fixed.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Jonathan Wiltshire  

Re: RFS: aescrypt

[mezgani ali]

What about README.Debian and README.source can i keep them empty and in the
case when the tools comes with a
readme.txt file ?

2011/1/17 Fernando Mercês 

> Ali,
>
> I'm not a mentor, but I believe that your questions can be answered by
> entire reading this article: 
> http://people.debian.org/~codehelp/
>
> Best regards,
>
> @Fernando Mercês Linux Registered User
> #432779
> www.mentebinaria.com.br
> http://linuxreversing.org
> http://softwarelivre-rj.org
>
> --
> Participe do I Hack'n Rio , dias 8 e 9 de abril na
> UFRJ!
>
> --
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 11:01 PM, mezgani ali  wrote:
>
>> Hi Jonathan,
>>
>> I thank you first for your suggestions, well i fixed most of them and here
>> i have some questions
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 12:05 AM, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I'm not in a position to sponsor your package, but I started reviewing it
>>> and found several problems:
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 09:08:28PM +, mezgani ali wrote:
>>> > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "aescrypt".
>>> >
>>> > * Package name: aescrypt
>>> >   Version : 3.05-1
>>> >   Upstream Author : Glenn Washburn , Paul E.
>>> > Jones , Mauro Gilardi 
>>> > * URL :  http://www.aescrypt.com/
>>> > * License : gpl
>>> >   Section : utils
>>> >
>>> > It builds these binary packages:
>>> > aescrypt   - Using a powerful 256-bit encryption algorithm,
>>>
>>> This isn't a suitable short description, and the long description gives
>>> no
>>> indication why I would want to use it. See the developer's reference for
>>> short description tips.
>>>
>>> > The package appears to be lintian clean.
>>>
>>> I doubt this, but I couldn't even build it to check:
>>>
>>> | make[1]: Entering directory `/tmp/aescrypt-3.05'
>>> | gcc -Wall -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -c aescrypt.c
>>> | gcc -Wall -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -c aes.c
>>> | gcc -Wall -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -c sha256.c
>>> | gcc -Wall -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -c password.c
>>> | gcc -Wall -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64  -o aescrypt aescrypt.o aes.o sha256.o
>>> password.o
>>> | install -o root -g root -m 755 aescrypt /usr/bin
>>> | install: cannot create regular file `/usr/bin/aescrypt': Permission
>>> denied
>>> | make[1]: *** [install] Error 1
>>>
>>> That implies that you've been building as root - the autobuild network
>>> doesn't, so you need to check for this. You should also use 'dpkg -c
>>> *.deb'
>>> to check the package contains the files you expect; in this case, it
>>> wouldn't have had the binary in.
>>>
>>> The watch file also fails:
>>>
>>> May a package contain obligatory  a watch file ?
>>
>>
>>> |-- Found watchfile in ./debian
>>> |-- In debian/watch, processing watchfile line:
>>> |
>>> http://www.aescrypt.com/cgi-bin/download?file=v3/aescrypt(.*)_source\.tar\.gz
>>> | uscan debug: requesting URL
>>> http://www.aescrypt.com/cgi-bin/download?file=v3/
>>> 
>>> | uscan warning: In debian/watch,
>>> |  no matching hrefs for watch line
>>> |
>>> http://www.aescrypt.com/cgi-bin/download?file=v3/aescrypt(.*)_source\.tar\.gz
>>>
>>> There's some trailing whitespace in debian/control, and as above you need
>>> to improve the short and long descriptions.
>>>
>>> Fixed
>>
>>
>>> The source files that have license grants at the top mention GPL2+, not
>>> GPL3+ as in your copyright file.
>>>
>>> Fixed
>>
>>
>>> The clean target does not remove debian/aescrypt.debhelper.log, so that
>>> file got included in your diff. The file debian/files is empty, get rid
>>> of
>>> it.
>>>
>>> Fixed
>>
>>
>>> README.Debian and README.source are also useless. A user looking in
>>> /usr/share/doc/aescrypt for those files will see Readme.txt right
>>> alongside
>>> them, so remove the extra step and leave it at that.
>>
>>
>> May i remove them or maybe append the content of Readme.txt file
>>
>>
>>> debian/rules includes lots of unneccessary calls and some lines are just
>>> commented out, so they can be removed to make it easier to read. It looks
>>> like it's just been copied from echoping:
>>>
>>> Fixed
>>
>>>  # Add here commands to install the package into debian/echoping.
>>>
>>> You can't pass DESTDIR into the upstream make file, because it never uses
>>> it - you'll have to persuade upstream to fix the makefile or patch it not
>>> to install files to /usr/bin. From the look of your debian/rules, you can
>>> probably use the small or tiny form for debhelper, which gets rid of
>>> almost
>>> all the clutter.
>>>
>>> After fixing the build system lintian has these pointers:
>>>
>>> I: aescrypt: extended-description-is-p

Re: RFS: aescrypt

[Fernando Lemos]

2011/1/16 mezgani ali :
>
> What about README.Debian and README.source can i keep them empty and in the
> case when the tools comes with a
> readme.txt file ?
[snip]

Please make sure you read this (read it all if you haven't yet):

http://www.debian.org/doc/maint-guide/

The things you are asking are documented there.

Regards,


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/AANLkTim3hCMKS5f-amkW6r4eh+AXWyUF3qB7Bb6ijs3=@mail.gmail.com

Re: RFS: aescrypt

[mezgani ali]

Please take a look to my new packages ;)
It seems to be Ok


Regards,

On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 1:36 AM, Fernando Lemos wrote:

> 2011/1/16 mezgani ali :
> >
> > What about README.Debian and README.source can i keep them empty and in
> the
> > case when the tools comes with a
> > readme.txt file ?
> [snip]
>
> Please make sure you read this (read it all if you haven't yet):
>
> http://www.debian.org/doc/maint-guide/
>
> The things you are asking are documented there.
>
> Regards,
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
> listmas...@lists.debian.org
> Archive:
> http://lists.debian.org/AANLkTim3hCMKS5f-amkW6r4eh+AXWyUF3qB7Bb6ijs3=@mail.gmail.com
>
>


-- 
Ali MEZGANI
Network Engineering/Security
http://securfox.wordpress.com/

Re: RFS: roxterm (updated package for experimental)

[Kan-Ru Chen]

Tony Houghton  writes:

> On 15/01/11 16:51, Kan-Ru Chen wrote:
>> Tony Houghton  writes:
>>
>>> On 15/01/11 08:26, Kan-Ru Chen wrote:
 OK. When I was doing the final test, roxterm existed immediately after
 launch. 1.18.5-3, however, has no such problem. I suspect it's only my
 environment, x86_64-linux-gnu. Do you have any clue?
>>>
>>> Can you rebuild it without the debugging symbols being stripped and get
>>> a backtrace?
>>
>> I tried. Not very useful, the backtrace only shows a "child-exited"
>> signal from somewhere.
>
> Please use the attached patch so we can see what command it's trying to
> run. Does it make a difference if you use a custom command or change the
> "Login shell" option? And in case you're not using standard Debian
> libvte packages let me know, because roxterm uses a different fork
> command with 0.26 or newer.

It printed

** (roxterm:18711): DEBUG: command: /usr/zsh, argv: /usr/zsh

Then I tested other commands with -e option:

 zsh   - failed
 bash  - OK
 vim   - OK
 emacs - failed
 nano  - failed
 zile  - OK
 top   - failed
 htop  - OK

If you can run above commands, it's probably my problem here; I can
upload it for wider test.

-- System Information:
Debian Release: 6.0
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)

Kernel: Linux 2.6.37-rc7-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash

Versions of packages roxterm depends on:
ii  libc6 2.11.2-8   Embedded GNU C Library: Shared lib
ii  libdbus-1-3   1.2.24-4   simple interprocess messaging syst
ii  libdbus-glib-1-2  0.88-2.1   simple interprocess messaging syst
ii  libglade2-0   1:2.6.4-1  library to load .glade files at ru
ii  libglib2.0-0  2.24.2-1   The GLib library of C routines
ii  libgtk2.0-0   2.20.1-2   The GTK+ graphical user interface 
ii  libice6   2:1.0.7-1  X11 Inter-Client Exchange library
ii  libpango1.0-0 1.28.3-1   Layout and rendering of internatio
ii  librsvg2-common   2.26.3-1   SAX-based renderer library for SVG
ii  libsm62:1.2.0-1  X11 Session Management library
ii  libvte9   1:0.24.3-2 Terminal emulator widget for GTK+ 


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/877he4xnje@anar.kanru.info

Re: RFS: openteacher

[Andreas Tille]

[Arvind, I hope you don't mind if I publish quotes from your private
 mail to the public list.  I do not really consider the information very
 private and it is important to share the information.  Otherwise you will
 not get further helpful input of other mentors.]

On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 09:00:50AM +0530, Arvind S Raj wrote:
> Also do forgive me if I'm asking really stupid questions-it's my first ever
> time at packaging and maintaining. Never done it before.

Sure.  No problem at all.
 
> >  - #Vcs-*
> >-> any reason why not just injecting the package to Vcs?  I'm in
> >   big favour of using team maintenance and thus I would really like
> >   you to use the Vcs and set the Tags accordingly
> >
> 
> I thought it is sufficient to add the launchpad link since it takes you to
> their official page that also has the links to the source.

The Vcs fields in Debian are used by some applications and thus should be
properly set.  Launchpad is not used inside applications at any debian.org
service.
 
> 1. I actually downloaded the source from sourceforge. They do their version
> control at launchpad. Do I have to add those links?

H, I admit I have no idea in how far sourceforge projects can do
version control at launchpad.  The sense of the Vcs tags in the Debian
package is to give links where *the* *Debian* *packaging* *stuff* (so
the content of your debian/ directory) is maintained.  In collab-qa you
do not keep just another copy of upstream code but you maintain the code
which is for Debian exclusively and you should NOT maintain the debian/
directory in the upstream source tree (for several reasons discussed
several times before).

When using Git it is a matter of policy if you keep a clone of the
upstream code or not in collab-qa.  In Svn usually only the debian/
directory is kept.
 
> 2. They use bzr for version control and so when I add the line "Vcs-Bzr: bzr
> branch lp:openteacher", it highlights "bzr branch lp:openteacher" in red. Is
> there anything wrong in the way I specified the bzr branch?

I further admit that I have no idea about bzr.  If you want me to
sponsor openteacher I would like to ask you to stick to SVN or Git for
maintaining the debian/ dir.  For the upstream code I do not need to
access the Vcs directly because only the tarball is used I do not care
at all about the Vcs.
> 
> >  - long description: Please do not add newlines
> >   inbetween each single item, using two spaces in the beginning of a
> >   line is sufficient to get the wanted pacing.  It might disturb the
> >   rendering in some applications
> 
> Done; do take a look if the present changes are sufficient once I've
> uploaded. I've also changed the description a bit.

If you would decide for a Vcs location at Alioth I could have a look...

> > debian/rules
> >  PLease replace the comment from the template
> >  in the beginning by something that makes sense
> >
> 
> It shall be done. I'm working on what I could add as the comment. What
> information needs to be included for sure in the comment? Is there any
> particular format?

Nothing special.  My debian/rules files usually start with

#!/usr/bin/make -f
# debian/rules file for 
# (C) Andreas Tille
# GPL

If you like you can be more verbose.  I just don't like it very much if
people simply leave the template which does not really fit the actual
file.  Please note:  If I'm writing in  this is no real
reason to stop me from uploading - just a hint for beginners who might
not have thought about certain stuff.

> What do I add in the watch file? I assumed that upstream sources are always
> in the archive format so what can I watch?

Try

   man uscan

In Debian there exist tools to scan upstream websites for new releases
to inform the maintainer that he needs to package this new version.
 
> > debian/opentecher.1: Manpage needs to be installed
> What did you mean by needs to be installed? I didn't get you.

$ lintian openteacher_2.0beta2-1_amd64.deb 
W: openteacher: binary-without-manpage usr/bin/openteacher

To fix this you want to add a file

  debian/manpages

with the content

debian/openteacher.1

(see man dh_installman) to make sure that the manpage you provided is
actually moved to the package.

Hope this helps

   Andreas.

-- 
http://fam-tille.de


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110117074140.ga16...@an3as.eu