Bug#1141346: RFS: noctalia/5.0.0~beta1-1 -- A sleek and minimal desktop shell thoughtfully crafted for Wayland

Hi,

* Simon Quigley <[email protected]> [2026-07-14 20:10]:
> Control: tags -1 +moreinfo
>
> Hello,
>
> Thanks for your work here.

thanks for your interest in this package.

> Please address the following Lintian
> output, especially the error and the warnings:
>
> E: noctalia: python3-script-but-no-python3-dep python3 (does not
> satisfy python3:any | python3-minimal:any)
> [usr/share/noctalia/assets/templates/kde/apply.py]

After discussion with upstream the python script has been removed.
functionality was reimplemented in c++.

<snip>

> W: noctalia: description-synopsis-starts-with-article
> N:
> N:   The first line of the "Description:" should omit any initial indefinite or
> N:   definite article: "a", "an", or "the". A good heuristic is that it should
> N:   be possible to substitute the package name and synopsis into this formula:
> N:
> N:   The package name provides {a,an,the,some} synopsis.
> N:
> N:   Please refer to The package synopsis, or short description (Section 6.2.2)
> N:   in the Debian Developer's Reference for details.
> N:
> N:   Visibility: warning
> N:   Show-Always: no
> N:   Check: fields/description

The description:

At the time of this RFS the package had the description:

"A sleek and minimal desktop shell thoughtfully crafted for Wayland"

since then, at the request of  upstream, I changed it to:

"A sleek, customizable desktop shell crafted for Wayland"

Perhaps it could be changed to:

"Sleek, customizable desktop shell crafted for Wayland"

But I don't know if it is better to respect the request of upstream here
or correct the lintian warning. I would appreciate guidance on this.

> W: noctalia: no-manual-page [usr/bin/noctalia]
> N:
> N:   Each binary in /usr/bin, /usr/sbin, /bin, /sbin or /usr/games should have
> N:   a manual page
> N:
> N:   Note that though the man program has the capability to check for several
> N:   program names in the NAMES section, each of these programs should have its
> N:   own manual page (a symbolic link to the appropriate manual page is
> N:   sufficient) because other manual page viewers such as xman or tkman don't
> N:   support this.
> N:
> N:   If the name of the manual page differs from the binary by case, man may be
> N:   able to find it anyway; however, it is still best practice to match the
> N:   exact capitalization of the executable in the manual page.
> N:
> N:   If the manual pages are provided by another package on which this package
> N:   depends, Lintian may not be able to determine that manual pages are
> N:   available. In this case, after confirming that all binaries do have manual
> N:   pages after this package and its dependencies are installed, please add a
> N:   Lintian override.
> N:
> N:   Please refer to Manual pages (Section 12.1) in the Debian Policy Manual
> N:   for details.
> N:
> N:   Visibility: warning
> N:   Show-Always: no
> N:   Check: documentation/manual
> N:   Renamed from: binary-without-manpage

Upstream does not provide a man page. There is however extensive
documentation at https://docs.noctalia.dev/noctalia/

I fear that any attempt to provide a man page would result in excessive
maintenance burden as the project evolves and would ultimately result in
the man page being out of date, incomplete, and simply wrong. I think
this is especially true since noctalai is still in beta.

> W: noctalia: old-fsf-address-in-copyright-file

Done.

<snip>

> W: noctalia: script-not-executable [usr/share/noctalia/assets/templates/cava/apply.sh]
> N:
> N:   This file starts with the #! sequence that marks interpreted scripts, but
> N:   it is not executable.
> N:
> N:   There has been some discussion to allow such files in paths other than
> N:   /usr/bin but there was ultimately no broad support for it.
> N:
> N:   Please refer to Bug#368792 for details.
> N:
> N:   Visibility: warning
> N:   Show-Always: no
> N:   Check: scripts
> N:
> N:
> W: noctalia: script-not-executable [usr/share/noctalia/assets/templates/emacs/output-path.sh]
> N:
> W: noctalia: script-not-executable [usr/share/noctalia/assets/templates/labwc/apply.sh]
> N:
> W: noctalia: script-not-executable [usr/share/noctalia/assets/templates/mango/apply.sh]
> N:
> W: noctalia: script-not-executable [usr/share/noctalia/assets/templates/niri/apply.sh]
> N:
> W: noctalia: script-not-executable [usr/share/noctalia/assets/templates/scroll/apply.sh]
> N:
> W: noctalia: script-not-executable [usr/share/noctalia/assets/templates/sway/apply.sh]
> N:

These scripts are not run directly, instead they are executed as
"bash /usr/share/noctalia/assetes/templates/foo/apply.sh"

See usr/share/noctalia/assets/templates/builtin.toml

So although it looks a little strange it is functional. I can open an
upstream issue and/or pr to make them all executable if that is
desired.

For now I added an override_dh_install to ensure all the template *.sh
scripts are executable. Is this acceptable?

> I: noctalia: desktop-entry-lacks-keywords-entry [usr/share/applications/dev.noctalia.Noctalia.desktop]
> N:
> N:   This .desktop file is either missing a Keywords entry, or it does not
> N:   contain keywords above and beyond those already present in the Name or
> N:   GenericName entries.
> N:
> N:   The Keywords field is intended to show keywords relevant for a .desktop
> N:   file.
> N:
> N:   Desktop files are organized in key-value pairs and are similar to INI
> N:   files.
> N:
> N:   The desktop-file-validate tool in the desktop-file-utils package may be
> N:   useful when checking the syntax of desktop entries.
> N:
> N:   Please refer to
> N:   https://specifications.freedesktop.org/desktop-entry-spec/latest/ar01s06.html,
> N:   Bug#693918, and
> N:   https://wiki.gnome.org/Initiatives/GnomeGoals/DesktopFileKeywords for
> N:   details.
> N:
> N:   Visibility: info
> N:   Show-Always: no
> N:   Check: menu-format

I will raise this with upstream.

> I: noctalia: file-references-package-build-path [usr/bin/noctalia]
> N:
> N:   The listed file or maintainer script appears to reference the build path
> N:   used to build the package as specified in the Build-Path field of the
> N:   .buildinfo file.
> N:
> N:   This is likely to cause the package to be unreproducible, but it may also
> N:   indicate that the package will not work correctly outside of the
> N:   maintainer's own system.
> N:
> N:   Please note that this tag will not appear unless the .buildinfo file
> N:   contains a Build-Path field. That field is optional. You may have to set
> N:   DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=buildinfo=+path or use
> N:   --buildinfo-option=--always-include-path with dpkg-buildpackage when
> N:   building.
> N:
> N:   Please refer to https://reproducible-builds.org/,
> N:   https://wiki.debian.org/ReproducibleBuilds/BuildinfoFiles, and the
> N:   dpkg-genbuildinfo(1) manual page for details.
> N:
> N:   Visibility: info
> N:   Show-Always: no
> N:   Check: files/contents

I see no 'usr/bin/noctali' in any .buildinfo files that I currently have
on disk for this package. Perhaps this is fixed in the current version,
or perhaps I'm not understanding what this lintian warning is stating.

> I: noctalia: font-in-non-font-package [usr/share/noctalia/assets/fonts/tabler.ttf]
> N:
> N:   This package contains a *.ttf, *.otf, or *.pfb file, file extensions used
> N:   by TrueType, OpenType, or Type 1 fonts, but the package does not appear to
> N:   be a dedicated font package. Dedicated font package names should begin
> N:   with fonts-. (Type 1 fonts are also allowed in packages starting with
> N:   xfonts-.) If the font is already packaged, you should depend on that
> N:   package instead. Otherwise, normally the font should be packaged
> N:   separately, since fonts are usually useful outside of the package that
> N:   embeds them.
> N:
> N:   Visibility: info
> N:   Show-Always: no
> N:   Check: fonts

This font is not currently packaged for Debian. Since this is listed as
an "info" not "warning" or "error", is it correct assume that this
should not be considered a show stopper?

> I: noctalia: font-outside-font-dir [usr/share/noctalia/assets/fonts/tabler.ttf]
> N:
> N:   This package contains a TrueType, OpenType, or Type 1 fonts, but the
> N:   package does not install this file under /usr/share/fonts/.
> N:
> N:   Please refer to https://wiki.debian.org/Fonts/PackagingPolicy for details.
> N:
> N:   Visibility: info
> N:   Show-Always: no
> N:   Check: fonts

As above, again this is an "info" so I hope it can remain.

I could potentially override the install location but I'm concerned that
may then require patching the upstream source to ensure the font is
found.

> I: noctalia source: older-debian-watch-file-standard 4 [debian/watch]
> N:
> N:   The version= line in the debian/watch file in this package declares an
> N:   older version. Please upgrade when you have a chance.
> N:
> N:   Please refer to the uscan(1) manual page for details.
> N:
> N:   Visibility: info
> N:   Show-Always: no
> N:   Check: debian/watch/standard

It has since been updated to version 5 (but this causes problems on
mentors.debian.net)

> I: noctalia: package-contains-documentation-outside-usr-share-doc [usr/share/noctalia/assets/fonts/tabler-icons-license.txt]
> N:
> N:   This package ships a documentation file outside /usr/share/doc
> N:   Documentation files are normally installed inside /usr/share/doc.
> N:
> N:   If this file doesn't describe the contents or purpose of the directory it
> N:   is in, please consider moving this file to /usr/share/doc/ or maybe even
> N:   removing it. If this file does describe the contents or purpose of the
> N:   directory it is in, please add a lintian override.

This file is not documentation it is a license file so I think it
should remain. I added an override.

<snip>

> P: noctalia source: package-uses-old-debhelper-compat-version 13

Updated to 14.

<snip>

> P: noctalia source: redundant-priority-optional-field [debian/control:3]

Removed.

<snip>

> P: noctalia source: redundant-rules-requires-root-no-field [debian/control:5]

Removed.

> X: noctalia source: debian-watch-does-not-check-openpgp-signature [debian/watch]

Upstream does not provide a signature

> X: noctalia: spelling-error-in-binary ment meant [usr/bin/noctalia]

<snip>

> N:    grep -rw <word> <source-tree>

Running "grep -rw ment *" in the source tree returned nothing.

> X: noctalia source: very-long-line-length-in-source-file 619 > 512 [third_party/luau/README.md:6]

This is a markdown file, not source code. It seems to be hand written to
me. I've added a lintian override.

<snip>
> X: noctalia source: very-long-line-length-in-source-file 671 > 512 [assets/templates/qt/qtct.conf:7]
> N:

This is a config file. Override added.

> X: noctalia source: very-long-line-length-in-source-file 694 > 512 [tools/notifications-test.sh:52]
> N:

This is a test script, and this long line is a long string used to test
the notifications system. Override added.

> X: noctalia source: very-long-line-length-in-source-file 740 > 512 [third_party/wuffs/wuffs-v0.4.c:49876]
>

This is indeed code, and is indeed generated. This is how wuffs is
supposed to be used. I can provide more information about wuffs if
requested.

> E: Lintian run failed - policy violation (worst tag: error)

The only error was related to the python usage, which has now been eliminated.

> Otherwise, this package does compile cleanly, and the copyright looks
> okay on a first glance.

Thanks, that's great to hear.

> Please remove the moreinfo tag from this bug once you have another
> iteration done.

Thanks. I *think* this email will remove that tag.

> Feel free to CC me, and if I'm available, I'll take another look.

You've already provided very useful feedback. Any more would be a bonus.

Thanks,

Nick.

--
https://useplaintext.email