[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Take over of texinfo/info packages



Norbert Preining <preining@logic.at> wrote:

> On Mit, 28 Sep 2005, Frank Küster wrote:
>> > For more than 5 weeks no answer. How do we proceed with this? We should
>> > think about something rather soon, as with teTeX 3 going into unstable
>> > texinfo is broken.
>> 
>> I think we do it rather now, than when I'm busy with uploading teTeX
>> 3.0.  Is the patch you posted to the bug log still up-to-date wrt to the
>> version on http://www.tug.org/texlive/Debian/texinfo/?
>
> Yes it is. But:
>
> lintian spits out:
> W: texinfo: binary-without-manpage texi2pdf

There is a manpage in the sources of teTeX 2.0.2 (and thus in the sid
Debian package, or on http://cvs.debian.org/*checkout*/tetex-bin/texk/tetex/texi2pdf.man?rev=1.1.1.2&cvsroot=tetex&content-type=application/x-troff-man

> W: texinfo: possible-bashism-in-maintainer-script postinst:3 '[ "$1" = "configure" -a '

- if [ "$1" = "configure" -a -z "$2" ] ; then
+ if [ "$1" = "configure" ] && [ -z "$2" ] ; then

> E: texinfo: old-fsf-address-in-copyright-file
> W: info: possible-bashism-in-maintainer-script postinst:3 '[ "$1" = "configure" -o '

- if [ "$1" = "configure" -o "$1" = "upgrade" ]; then
+ if [ "$1" = "configure" ] || [ "$1" = "upgrade" ]; then

> E: info: old-fsf-address-in-copyright-file
>
> What the hell is this stupid old-fsf-address-in-copyright-file error. 

Doesn't lintian tell you more with "-i"?  web.ask.com pointed me to

,---- Lintian report for old-fsf-address-in-copyright-file
| 
|     The /usr/share/doc/pkg/copyright file refers to the old postal
|     address of the Free Software Foundation (FSF). The new address is:
| 
|   Free Software Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place - Suite 330, Boston,
|   MA 02111-1307, USA.
| 
`----

Of course this is an upstream issue, just as the manpage.

> But what is with the bashism?! 

That test or [ understands boolean operators is specific to bash, or at
least it isn't guaranteed by POSIX and probably not implemented in the
test builtins of dash and posh.

> Do you accept it like this? Or should I prepare a new 0.1.

We're not really in a hurry; I'd say fix them first.

> And: Did we come to the conclusion that I write myself as teh new
> Maintainer or that I make a NMU upload?

In fact we were always talking about taking over.  So it's gonna be
4.8-1, with you as the maintainer and your signature in the changelog
file.

Regards, Frank
-- 
Frank Küster
Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer



Reply to: