[Pkg-samba-maint] OpenChange packages

[Steve Langasek]

Feedback:

On Fri, Aug 01, 2008 at 06:12:56PM +0200, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:

> Yesterday I've uploaded a new Samba 4 to experimental, which should be
> compatible with current OpenChange/.

> I have now also updated the OpenChange packaging. Any chance you can
> have another look at it? The packaging itself is in Subversion,
> pre-built packages are available from my debian repo
> (http://samba.org/~jelmer/debian/experimental/)

You have each of the -dev packages depending on pkg-config.  There was a
recent discussion on debian-devel about this; did you see it?:

  http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2008/04/msg00151.html

I think the consensus that arose in that thread was that -dev packages
should not depend on pkg-config just because they provide .pc files.  Or
maybe I just think that's the consensus because it was my own position:

  http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2008/04/msg00263.html

I would encourage you to consider the arguments given in that thread, and
whether pkg-config should be dropped as a dependency.  Either way, though,
that's not a blocker for sponsorship.

There's a typo (a doubled space) in the libocpf0 short description:

 Description: Client library for the MAPI  protocol

And the long description doesn't make it clear how/why this library is
different from libmapi itself?

I see you're using dh_install --list-missing --fail-missing, great!  And I
also notice that you aren't shipping any .a libraries in the -dev packages.
So I guess either upstream doesn't support building them, or you didn't pass
--enable-static.  Is this deliberate?

	mkdir -p $(CURDIR)/debian/tmp/usr/modules/dcerpc_server
	[...]
	mkdir -p $(CURDIR)/debian/tmp/usr/lib/samba/dcerpc_server
	mv $(CURDIR)/debian/tmp/usr/modules/dcerpc_server/* \
	   $(CURDIR)/debian/tmp/usr/lib/samba/dcerpc_server
	rm -rf $(CURDIR)/debian/tmp/usr/modules

Hrm, kinda fugly - no better way to tell upstream build rules to a) make the
directory themselves, b) make it in the right place?

	dh_link -plibmapi0 usr/lib/libmapi.so.0.8 usr/lib/libmapi.so.0
	dh_link -plibmapiadmin0 usr/lib/libmapiadmin.so.0.8 usr/lib/libmapiadmin.so.0
	dh_link -plibmapiproxy0 usr/lib/libmapiproxy.so.0.8 usr/lib/libmapiproxy.so.0
	dh_link -plibocpf0 usr/lib/libocpf.so.0.8 usr/lib/libocpf.so.0

Wouldn't these be better done as debian/$package.links files and a single
call to dh_link? (Typically in the binary-arch target - by calling these
per-package commands in the install target, you're creating the
debian/$package dirs before anything else needs them.)

The get-orig-source target works nicely, btw. :-)

Finally, what do you think of listing out the copyright holders individually
in debian/copyright?  There don't seem to be *too* many of them (~8), but
Tridge is one of them so I don't think the current "and the OpenChange team"
is accurate?  (This one is probably a blocker, if not for sponsorship then
probably for passing the Debian NEW queue.)

Fairly minor stuff - if you can fix up and/or explain the things I've
pointed out, I'm happy to sponsor this ASAP.

Cheers,
-- 
Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                                    http://www.debian.org/
slangasek at ubuntu.com                                     vorlon at debian.org