Re: Bug#467650: debian-edu: Downloads things, does not clean up after itself.
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Cc: Custom Debian Distributions <email@example.com>
- Subject: Re: Bug#467650: debian-edu: Downloads things, does not clean up after itself.
- From: Andreas Tille <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 18:04:29 +0100 (CET)
- Message-id: <alpine.DEB.1.00.0802281751580.7645@wr-linux02>
- In-reply-to: <email@example.com>
- References: <20080226175431.GA10289@roeckx.be> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <alpine.DEB.1.00.0802281617410.30120@wr-linux02> <email@example.com>
On Thu, 28 Feb 2008, Holger Levsen wrote:
Hm. Maybe. I was fairly sure I've seen wrong bugs (in different packages)
closed recently, but maybe it was a longer time ago...
But still, reassigning takes to seconds. (And I've already done it for this
Sure. But I like to ask for agreement of the reporter first
(but do not like to weit more than three days for ack ...)
You dont need to be the bugreporter to rate FTBFS and missing sources as clear
policy violations :-) (The missing sources are not intentional, thats why I
set #468346 to important only.)
Surely anybody is able to rate a bug differently - but I personally
would regard it rude to do it without the agreement of the reporter.
He should at least have a chance to opt in.
Moreover I do not think that sources are _really_ missing. We
are clearly at the borderline here. Anyway, I'm thinking about
the following approach:
1. Add a "dist" target to the Makefile of the source package.
2. Build the tarball from SVN by doing make dist.
Perhaps a time stamp in dist.stamp or something makes
3. In this proces debian/control (which should be _not_ checked
in into SVN, because it is auto generated) should be builded.
It should _not_ be touched later on.
4. Perhaps we add a line:
XS-Warning: Do not touch this control file manually. It is
auto generated blabla
(Please correct me if I'm wrong, but XS-* tags should be
ignred and thus we could use it as comment, right?
This should solve on the one hand the problem of generating an
up to date debian/control (in case we let not rot the source tarball
very long anywhere) while beeing able to get rid of this
network at bauild time / download stuff which belongs to source
This approach would automatically solve the other issues.
Petter, you invented the current system. What do you think?
Also, the severity is at the maintainers discretion.