Hi Tobias
The BTS will probably not get a copy as it was closed, i'd need to bts
reopen 972073 (and unarchive when it was archived),
but I'll skip that for now.
On 13.10.2020 21:26, Tobias Frost wrote:
On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 09:44:17AM +0200, Gürkan Myczko wrote:
* Package name : cool-retro-term
Version : 1.1.1+git20200723-1
Upstream Author : Filippo Scognamiglio <flsco...@gmail.com>
* URL : https://github.com/Swordfish90/cool-retro-term
* License : GPL-3, MIT, OFL-1.1, dfsg-compliant-text,
BSD-3-clause
* Vcs :
https://salsa.debian.org/myczko-guest/cool-retro-term
Section : x11
Uploaded, but a question:
README.source says it is repackaged, due to dfsg topics. However, I'm
missing the dfsg suffix and also a Files-Excluded section in
d/copyright.
How is the repacking done?
The qmltermwidget part is +ds, and the fonts +dfsg, sorry I completely
forgot
to add +dfsg, will do so with the next update. (I had forgotten to
reflect the
repackaging with +dfsg/+ds for a long time, but recently re-added it to
later
sponsored uploads). And I'm aware of Files-Excluded section as well,
have it
at some places, will need to add for all others where README.source
documents
removals)
Other nitpicks:
(Though, it is strange that dh_missing fails on you; not sure how
dh_missing
can cause a file to be overwritten.)
Very strange indeed, I did not investigate, just override it for now, to
get
rid of the RC bug.
Something for subsequent uploads (not checked if legit)
X: fonts-hermit: package-contains-no-arch-dependent-files
X: fonts-proggy: package-contains-no-arch-dependent-files
X: fonts-terminus: package-contains-no-arch-dependent-files
Having seen that of course I tried to change it to Arch: all, however
that would fail with:
http://phd-sid.ethz.ch/debian/cool-retro-term/2323/cool-retro-term_1.1.1%2Bgit20200723-1_amd64.build
Even more strange, if you have a tip/pointer/hint/idea, I'd be glad to
get rid of those.
P: cool-retro-term source: maintainer-manual-page
debian/cool-retro-term.1
manpage forwarded?
Good point, let me check:
Well, no, yes, upstream hasn't done a release for some time, and he
ships his own packaging/debian directory
with a manpage there, which is slightly different. I will need to think
about what to do here. I believe his
is better, but will need to compare/diff and update accordingly.
Something for a future/next upload.
the patches need dep3 headers.
Ok two small patches of me, I can fill the dep3 headers I guess, also
with next upload.
override_dh_auto_configure is a NOP.
ACK, to be fixed with next upload.
Cheers,
--
tobi
