[Pkg-giraffe-discuss] workaround to get zarafa-7.2.0 build?

[Carsten Schoenert]

Hello Guido,

Am 10.06.2015 um 20:09 schrieb Guido Günther:
> I just noticed that you made changes to the debian/sid branch on alioth
> that conflict with my dh sequencer work in debian/{rules,control}:
> 
>     https://github.com/agx/zarafa-debian/tree/WiP/dh-sequencer
> 
> Doing the switch to dh removes lots of code and makes us get things
> right without having to open code for it (like calling ldconfig). I
> won't have time to merge this with your work _and_ test it in the
> upcoming weeks so maybe you want to pull this in?

Sure, I can do this. Sorry if I've broke things for you.
With the help from Jelle the things on zarafa-webapp looks really good
now and there isn't really much more we can do before the PHP things are
cleaned out. This should be done with the next release by Zarafa for
zarafa-webapp.

> Some minor things I noticed when looking at the new commits:
> 
> * Better use debian/<pkg>.links instead of creating them via ln. There's
>   far too much open coded stuff in debian/rules already, we should not
>   extend on this one.

I agree, the intention behind all this changes was simply to keep
Lintian so quite as possible to jump then over to the small other
issues. In the end I would like of course debian/rules get to debhelper
"style" (you already started that). But instead to make a big change now
I would trying to get the packages in first in a more use usable state.
If we have all the installation of these packages in a good shape then I
would start to move over into a clean debhelper 9 state.

By this we would see if the functionality after that change is the same
as before. Right now it's a little bit difficult working together if the
structure inside debian/ is frequently significant changing as the
impact is mostly a greater thing. Without such changes now we could work
on specific issues like the start/stop behavior with the systemd service
files or the adoption for Apache 2.4 for example.

> * I wonder wether the Conflict: or the Breaks: zarafa (<< 7.2) is
>   correct (or necessary at all). What was the reason for changing this?

Of course based on a Lintian warning. From the first view I was thinking
this warning doesn't matter in our case, there are no older versions
within the Debian repos. But there could be users who have installed
packages directly from the Zarafa repository and we can get then some
clashes.

> I also started to switch to dh 9 (so we get hardening flags, etc. for
> free too) but continuing on this wone doesn't make sense until the rest
> is merged.

I don't hang on my old commits, if it would be easier and time saving
for you I would suggest to simply revert my commits.
So how to move on? By writing this email I haven't had a look into your WIP.

---
Regards
Carsten Schoenert