[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: MBF alert: packages with very long source / .deb filenames

On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 11:56:22 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:

> >Right, that's certainly true for the lib.*-perl packages, and I
> >wouldn't know how we should rename them in a sane way.
> In the worst case that I'm looking at, I'm a little surprised by the
> names here on two fronts:
> libcgi-application-basic-plugin-bundle-perl_0.5.orig-CGI-Application-Plugin-ValidateRM-2-3.tar.gz
> 1. Why the "bundle" ?

Because the ftp-masters don't (or at least didn't) want small
packages in the archive.
From the packaging point of view we'd split them up immediately if
that was ok for them. Cf. #606411.
> 2. Why such a silly long name? What will happen if somebody comes
>    along with another perl module to add to this bundle, but with a
>    name twice as long? Does the source name for this tarball have to
>    contain the whole of the bundle name?

As far as I understand source format v3 with multiple upstream
tarballs, the first part (up to .orig) can't be changed as it needs
to be the same as for the "main" package. [0] The second part (the
component) name is free-form, and as I said earlier, here's a bit of
room for us to shorten it (in this case e.g. from
CGI-Application-Plugin-ValidateRM-2-3 to ValidateRM).


[0] Although in this case the package name itself is made up and
could be shortend from libcgi-application-basic-plugin-bundle-perl to
something like libcgi-application-plugins-perl.

 .''`.   http://info.comodo.priv.at/ -- GPG key IDs: 0x8649AA06, 0x00F3CFE4
 : :' :  Debian GNU/Linux user, admin, & developer - http://www.debian.org/
 `. `'   Member of VIBE!AT & SPI, fellow of Free Software Foundation Europe
   `-    NP: David Bowie: Tvc 15

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: