Re: Packaging review

Ross Vandegrift, 2014-03-20 20:40:21 -0400 : > Hello, Hi again, I haven't heard much about the packaging of Paperwork and its dependencies recently… can I do anything to help? Roland. -- Roland Mas We reject: kings, presidents and voting. We believe in: rough consensus and running code. -

Re: Packaging review

[Ross Vandegrift, 2014-03-24] > Thanks for the help! I have a question on one bit of lintian4py > output. What should I do with this: > > e: python-pyocr: missing-dependency-on-byte-compilation-helper > pycompile => python (>= 2.6.5) if you have "python:any" in Depends, please send patches to l

Re: Packaging review

Hi Ross, sorry for the late reply. On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 2:48 AM, Ross Vandegrift wrote: > e: python-pyocr: missing-dependency-on-byte-compilation-helper > pycompile => python (>= 2.6.5) > > Does this indicate a problem in my Build-Depends on python-all and > python3-all? No, that is about bin

Re: Packaging review

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Hi Dmitry, Thanks for the help! I have a question on one bit of lintian4py output. What should I do with this: e: python-pyocr: missing-dependency-on-byte-compilation-helper pycompile => python (>= 2.6.5) Does this indicate a problem in my Build

Re: Packaging review

Also, please run lintian4python to inspect your packages. It reports some errors, like: e: python3-pyinsane: pyflakes-undefined-name usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/pyinsane/rawapi.py:62: cmp e: python3-pyinsane: pyflakes-undefined-name usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/pyinsane/rawapi.py:425: MAX_USERN

Re: Packaging review

Hi Ross, I cannot upload your packages, but I had a quick look at them. They mostly look good, but there are minor issues: - Your copyright files don't comply to copyright format 1.0. - The license description should be indented with a space. - You shouldn't refer to symlinks like /usr/shar