Add provides for deb #53
Loading…
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "refs/pull/53/head"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
https://codeberg.org/librewolf/issues/issues/3043
-m
"someone <one-of-yous@askjeeves.com>"?or
"", if that omits the fieldit seems section apparently cannot be specified (or i'm blind)
@degausser wrote in https://codeberg.org/librewolf/bsys6/pulls/53#issuecomment-15039561:
I'm not sure if updating the maintainer has any consequences, so would need confirmation from someone else
Edit:
Seems like the Maintainer was listed as
Maintainer: Bert van der Weerd <bert@stanzabird.nl>before I moved it to fpmNot sure if we have any LibreWolf email to use in here
current deb ships with
Maintainer: <@4d51329c98e3>, so it was already changed during the switch to fpm[1] fromBert van der Weerd <bert@stanzabird.nl>codeberg.org/librewolf/bsys6@6034c0c0c1 (diff-d666c282c9). imho decide on someone current (ohfp?), the address can be piped to base64 if shallow scrapers/spam are a concern.[1] is it just a random string fpm injects, because it is a mandatory field?
ninja'd, should have refreshed...
ooof, it is actually worse, each fpm run randomizes the string :) *actually the hostname of the ci runner
150.0.2-1-linux-x86-64 has
Maintainer: <@73c22df450f4>150.0.2-1-linux-arm64 has
Maintainer: <@8ee0c45f4791>150.0.3-1-linux-x86-64 has
Maintainer: <@4d51329c98e3>150.0.3-1-linux-arm64 has
Maintainer: <@2227bb5ea4ea>at leastdpkg complains when-m ""would be advisableMaintaineris missing or blank, so better specify something--category
web@degausser I'm short on time and still need to port the patches for next release, so the Maintainer thing will have to wait until I find out what to use.
How about I just add your email 😉
@any1here heh, I'm flattered (...I guess?), but I prefer to keep my distance from the maintainer team, at least for now, and instead sporadically annoy you all in the comments 😁
The
Section:change is basically cosmetic, aligns librewolf with other browsers on debian-based systems; might be also worth once in a while to bump dependencies based on the official firefox deb, afaik the current set is the result of Alyx's revert to an older state, after the misunderstanding with the trixie deps.it kinda sucks that crossbuilding rpms was a pain, fpm has some untreated rough edges (like this maintainer thing, or unsupported alternative
|dependencies for example).@degausser wrote in https://codeberg.org/librewolf/bsys6/pulls/53#issuecomment-15077205:
Mh... you really should consider joining the matrix room, then we would not need to hijack unrelated issues anymore ;P
Personally, probably would put something generic for the .deb (since its required here I think?).
As we've seen with Bert these things tend to get outdated and nobody really thinks about updating them.
Don't even mind the random value tbh, since for everything non highly security related the first way of contacting probably should be a issue and not a email. We're not really a graybeard project that is build around mailing-lists 🫣
@alyx161 the issue with the field is more that it changes every build (pulls the runner hostname), not that it isn't descript enough / viable for comms ; you could pass
-m "LibreWolf Team <@>"and so satisfy dpkg (and hopefully the rpm side too, dunno)nah
I think its only required for the deb.
rpm does not require it at all. (tho not sure of fpm can handle it correctly)
well, with rpm, fpm seems to map it to the optional Packager field, and beyond that uses it in the package changelog; but yes, no format requirements.