[Pkg-shadow-devel] out of my depth

Bálint Réczey balint at balintreczey.hu
Tue Nov 22 01:23:56 UTC 2016

2016-11-22 2:19 GMT+01:00 Serge E. Hallyn <serge at hallyn.com>:
> Quoting Bálint Réczey (balint at balintreczey.hu):
>> Hi Serge,
>> I started reviewing the new package. The changes in Debian look good
>> but the generated
>> files in the original tarball do worry me.
>> Those are not present in tag 4.4 in upstream repository.
> Hi,
> Are you talking about the po/*.gmo files?  They keep getting
> autogenerated now witha 'make dist'.  That is what the first email
> in this thread was asking about, in particular:
> |>> autogen.sh calls autoreconf which calls autopoint, which creates
> |>> m4/po.m4, which creates po/Makefile.in.in, which creates a makefile
> |>> which ends up calling
> |>>
> |>> cd $(srcdir) && rm -f $${lang}.gmo && $(GMSGFMT) -c --statistics -o t-$${lang}.gmo $${lang}.po && mv t-$${lang}.gmo $${lang}.gmo
> |>>
> |>> etc.  The *.gmo files are binary ones, which we don't want to be
> |>> shipping iiuc.  So - what is an ignorant packager to do?  It seems
> |>> like there must be an obvious flag to add to autoreconf in autogen.sh,
> |>> but I can't find it.
> So they are not in the git tree but they are in fact in the upstream tarball.
> I could manually pull them out of the packaging source.orig.gz if that's
> the right thing to do...

Please don't use make dist.
Manually running "git archive" or using the github-provided tar.gz is the
best way to go. This way you get rid of Makefile.ins, etc.


>> Please use the original upstream tarball for packaging then I'll
>> continue the review.
>> Cheers,
>> Balint
>> PS: I would also remove the debian packaging branch and the packaging
>> tags from GitHub since they can be confusing.
> Yeah, agreed, I just deleted them.

More information about the Pkg-shadow-devel mailing list