[Debian-med-packaging] Psortb has errors in Perl testsuite

[gregor herrmann]

On Fri, 21 Apr 2017 15:50:23 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 02:40:35PM +0100, Carnë Draug wrote:
> > On 21 April 2017 at 00:02, gregor herrmann <gregoa at debian.org> wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > - Putting the last two issues together, I think that repackaging the
> > >   tarball in order to remove the 2 files would be the best solution;
> > >   if they're just gone we don't have to worry about merge issues with
> > >   the patch or about copyright/license issues with the files.
> > >
> > > [0] cf. https://pkg-perl.alioth.debian.org/howto/repacking.html
> > 
> > The actual license for those files is in section 6 of the README file
> > named 'libsvm·COPYRIGHT·AND·LICENCE'.  Since lack of license is not an
> > issue, should I still do the repackaging or should I use debian/rules
> > to remove them?

Oops, sorry for missing this.

In that case, you could also add it to d/copyright as:

Files: libsvm.*
Copyright: 2000-2002, Chih-Chung Chang and Chih-Jen Lin
License: BSD-3
Comment: The copyright/license information is taken from the
 top-level README file.

License: BSD-3
 …

/*
And remove the comment from the "Files: *" stanza.
The new comment to help the ftp-masters find the data who might miss
it as I did :)
*/
 

> I don't know about Perl team policy but I personally agree with Gregor
> that removing those files is the most easy to understand way and I for
> myself would prefer this solution.

I don't think we have a strict policy for how to handle such cases,
and all options have some pros and cons:
- As mentioned, the remove-via-a-patch can be a bit fragile in the
  future.
- Repackagaging (as +ds in this case) is quite clear but a bit
  heavy-handed.
- Some package use debian/rules to move unwanted files back and forth
  before after build (deleting them is a bit messy when they are in
  git and cause warnings by dpkg-source, although this also works).
  Examples: the perl packages in [0]
- What I'm wondering is if we need any special treatment at all;
  aren't the changes in remove-3rd-party-libsvm.patch (Makefile.PL
  SVM.xs bindings.h) enough to use the system lib? OTOH, it's safer
  if the bundled versions are not around ...

I guess I'd go for the option of backupping+restoring the 2 files in
debian/rules. But repackaging sounds ok to me as well.


Cheers,
gregor

[0]
https://codesearch.debian.net/search?q=mv.*\.save\s+path%3Adebian%2Frules

-- 
 .''`.  https://info.comodo.priv.at/ - Debian Developer https://www.debian.org
 : :' : OpenPGP fingerprint D1E1 316E 93A7 60A8 104D  85FA BB3A 6801 8649 AA06
 `. `'  Member of VIBE!AT & SPI, fellow of the Free Software Foundation Europe
   `-   NP: Led Zeppelin: Stairway to Heaven
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 963 bytes
Desc: Digital Signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debian-med-packaging/attachments/20170424/30a60fe1/attachment.sig>