[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: debian package

On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 12:50 PM, Erik Huelsmann <..hidden..> wrote:
> Hi Philippe,
> 2011/9/27 Philippe Clérié <..hidden..>:

>> - the first problem is that the files that are included in the package do not
>> constitute the entire application. The files included are the top level
>> scripts and the ./LedgerSMB directory. In particular, the ./tools and the
>> ./sql directories are not in the package.

Also you'd need everything in scripts and bin.  And for 1.3, the sql
files are designed to be re-run from a Perl interface if needed.
> That's a problem, because the ./sql directory contains the schema
> information required to create the company databases.
>> - the other problem so far is that lintian complains a lot about the default
>> install location:
>> E: ledgersmb: file-in-usr-local usr/local/share/perl/5.10.1/rest.pl
>> W: ledgersmb: file-in-unusual-dir usr/local/share/perl/5.10.1/rest.pl
>> It's not clear to me how to change that. Even if I did I don't know what
>> location would conform to Debian policy.
> You could try looking at other packages; another web-application you
> could look at might be OTRS. Personally, I prefer to have my
> applications and their libraries sitting in /usr/lib, the config in
> /etc/<app> and any supporting files required to store runtime info in
> /var/lib/<app>. That seems to match the most-often used structure
> best.

A simple temporary solution would be to copy the ledgersmb.conf file
to /etc/ and simlink it.  However I am not adverse to ensuring that we
can always patch LedgerSMB/Sysconfig.pm so that this location can be
>> - There are a few other warnings but I hope to track them down eventually.
>> Thanks for any suggestion...
>> PS. I have sent a message to the debian pkg-sql-ledger-discussion. Hopefully
>> there'll be a reply. But the list hasn't seen any activity since December.
> If they don't come with any responses, please don't hesitate to mail
> this list and thanks for picking up this task! It's greatly
> appreciated, at least by me.

I know that .deb packages are not infrequently discussed here. So I
would expect there to be replies here.

One thing I would request though:  If there are patches you want to
make so things conform to Debian conventions, please submit them back.
 Even if they ONLY apply to Debian and related, I would prefer to have
everything necessary to build the .deb available in dists/deb/ but
this hasn't happened yet.  I say this because I think it is easier if
everyone has access to all necessary porting info when
problems/conflicts arise.

Best Wishes,
Chris Travers