[Debian-med-packaging] Please upload NEW hhsuite

Laszlo Kajan lkajan at rostlab.org
Thu Feb 23 10:15:42 UTC 2012


Hello Andreas!

> I obviosely found time now and did the upload.  When doing so I noticed
> some oth issue which might be worth considering:  There is a quite large
> amount of arch all files inside the hhsuite deb.  Lintian can detect
> this if the data are residing in /usr/share and I would actually
> consider these files placed there more logically.  It would make sense
> to split these files from the arch=any package to a separate arch=all
> package named for instance hhsuite-data and make hhsuite depend from it.
> The rationale is to save disk space and bandwidth for our mirrors.  This
> should be considered for one of the future versions.

I know. I've notified upstream (Andreas Hauser) about this. I am waiting for his confirmation/help with what is indeed arch indep and what is
not. Once I see this clearly I will bring out an hhsuite-data pack (arch=all) for those parts and put them into /usr/share/hhsuite-data. I will
also have to patch paths though so that the data is still found where expected - something I am /not/ looking forward to... this is the main
reason why there is no hhsuite-data yet.

> Moreover it might be that we need to work a bit in the tasks files which
> are just mentioning hhsuite but there are some other binary packages
> which might (or might not - I'm just asking the experts hereby) make sense
> to be listed separately in the list of our packages (and as dependencies
> in metapackages.

You mean ffindex? Andreas, do you release ffindex separately or only as part of the hhsuite? I am going to make an entry for it in the tasks file.

** Andreas I think I made a mistake! **
In the upload ffindex has the same version number (uses the same changelog) as hhsuite - that's wrong. It has its own version
(lib/ffindex/VERSION: 0.9.2)! I think I've corrected this now but I am not sure it did it correctly: I gave ffindex (and libffindex) its own
debian/*.changelog files. Could you please have a look? What do we do now? Can we correct this before it gets accepted (iff) with the higher
version number?

Thanks for the help and the comments Andreas!

Best regards,

Laszlo



More information about the Debian-med-packaging mailing list