Re: sbuild package
On Wed, Aug 04, 2004 at 11:48:14AM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
> Right, the wanna-build src package from cvs.linux-m68k.org must be
> group-maintained at alioth. It still has no Build-Depends line in its control
> file and still strictly build-depends by old packages like python1.5 from
> stable. Also the sbuild deb produced by this src package contains the tool of
> 'andrea' whereas the sbuild 0.30 from unstable doesn't contain the andrea
> tool. I think that if we want two sbuild packages for some reason (which
> reminds me about dinstall and mini-dinstall), then the sbuild 0.30 package
> from unstable must be renamed as mini-sbuild or sbuild-lite or similar,
> otherwise the sbuild 0.30 in the unstable archive must be replaced by sbuild
> from wanna-build src package (I'm not sure why it can not be a drop-in
> replacement :-/). That wanna-build src package must produces the following
> debs: wanna-build, buildd, sbuild, andrea (currently bundled within the
> sbuild deb), quinn-diff, rbuild, and wanna-build-doc (upstreamed by
> http://m68k.debian.org/buildd/abstract/node2.html). It would be nice if this
> wanna-build thingie uses extensively debconf to ask for configurations. Hm,
> where to find sources and docs for the dinstall (not mini-dinstall) program?
There are far too many 'must' in your post here.
The Debian buildd admins are the maintainers of these packages, and they
have chosen to maintain them how they see fit. It's Free Software, so
you are free to fork wanna-build every day, but don't expect the Debian
buildd admins to use your code or the Debian project trying to make them
to.
If you want to improve on the packaging side, I suggest you pick up the
work done by Roger Leigh and try to submit some well-contained patches
to the buildd admins first. If that doesn't help, make your own packages
and advertise them somewhere.
Michael
Reply to: