[Pkg-octave-devel] Packaging octplot

[Rafa Rodriguez Galvan]

El mar, 29-11-2005 a las 19:08, Rafael Laboissiere escribió: 
> * Rafa Rodriguez Galvan <rafael.rodriguez at uca.es> [2005-11-28 22:42]:
> 
> > Well, I've been looking at it... I'm a novice, but it doesn't look
> > difficult: if you help me, I'm willing to try it. What do you recommend
> > me for beginning from zero? Writing my own debian/rules, based on the
> > DOG guidelines? Taking any package as a model? Is cdbs compatible with
> > the DOG guidelines?
> 
> I started using cdbs for other packages and I must say that it is really
> great.  In particular, if the package is well written for using
> autoconf/automake/libtool, then we can get almost everything working with
> CDBS with minimal debian/* files.
>
> I would try first CDBS.  If that does not work, then dh-make.  As regards
> compatibility with the DOG Guidelines, I would say there should be no
> problems.

OK, as you can see in svn, I've the packaged octplot using CBDS!
 
The debian/* files are very simple and follow the DOG guidelines. After
adding the appropriate configure options (using the MDIR and OCTDIR 
variables), I had only one problem: between the last "debuild" messages,
lintian was complaining:

--
E: octplot: shlib-with-non-pic-code
usr/lib/octave/site/oct/api-v13/i486-pc-linux-gnu/octplot_command.oct
E: octplot: shlib-with-non-pic-code
usr/lib/octave/site/oct/api-v13/i486-pc-linux-gnu/octplot_redraw.oct
E: octplot: shlib-with-non-pic-code
usr/lib/octave/site/oct/api-v13/i486-pc-linux-gnu/octplot_path.oct
--

I suppose this comes from the Debian Policy: "The shared version of a 
library must be compiled with -fPIC, and the static version must not be.
In other words, each source unit (*.c, for example, for C files) will 
need to be compiled twice."

But I've been searching for PIC stuff in any other of the DOG packages
and found noting. So I decided to add to debian/rules the line:

CXXFLAGS += -fPIC

and the problem seems solved. 

Some other comments: 

1) Between the octplot prerequisites, expressed by the upstream
developer in the README file, are: "octave-forge >= 2004.07.07" and
"ghostscript if you want pdf,png and jpg hardcopy. Otherwise you are 
stuck with eps/ps only (not so bad IMHO)"

So, I've included in debian/control an explicit dependency on 
octave-forge, and recommended (instead of depended on) 
"gs-gpl | gs-esp".

On the other hand, I added build-depend on libfltk1.1-dev and
xlibmesa-gl-dev.

2) I havent fixed the next lintian warning:

--
W: octplot: extra-license-file
usr/lib/octave/site/oct/api-v13/i486-pc-linux-gnu/fonts/copying
--

This file contains another copy of GPL v2. What should I do? 
May I remove this file? Should I suggest the upstream developer
he to remove it?


-- 
Rafa Rodriguez Galvan.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cadiz University (UCA).                 OSLUCA (Free Software Office, UCA)
Department of Mathematics.                 [1] http://softwarelibre.uca.es