Re: gbrowse2 package
On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 03:51:52PM +0100, Olivier Sallou wrote:
> I use latest lintian and man pages are present in my package, I checked.
> Did you apply the patch?
Uhmm, not my day - old patch. :-(
> I added many of the man pages with the patch
While it is perfectly valid to add the man pages via a patch (especially
if you plan to foreward this patch upstream) I would consider it way
more usual to move all manpages written by a Debian Maintainer to
debian/*.1. So what you are doing is not really wrong but might not
be the best idea (= just a hint, feel free to keep it as is).
> Lintian still show 3 missing man pages and some man issues in a few.
> Fixing man issue may be difficult as doc is extracted from perl files
> automatically (perl2mod I think or something like that).
If lintian is simply nitpicking and you would like to provide the
manpages that way you might consider debian/lintian-overrides to make
sure these warnings will not hide other problems. With lintian 2.4.3
I get in addition to the manpage issues:
W: gbrowse: embedded-javascript-library usr/share/gbrowse2/htdocs/js/prototype.js
W: gbrowse: embedded-javascript-library usr/share/gbrowse2/htdocs/js/scriptaculous.js
As lintian suggests you might consider making the package dependant from
libjs-prototype and libjs-scriptaculous and add debian/links width
usr/share/javascript/prototype/prototype.js usr/share/gbrowse2/htdocs/js/prototype.js
usr/share/javascript/scriptaculous/scriptaculous.js usr/share/gbrowse2/htdocs/js/scriptaculous.js
(Just did something similar with python-cogent).
> I gonna move bins as requested
I did it before I wrote my last mail.
Thanks for your packaging work (and sorry for the confusion I might have
caused when inspecting old code). Charles, could your please have a
look if you consider it ready for sponsering?
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: