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

Re: Creating New Derivative Volian



Hi Blake,

Quoting blake@volitank.com (2021-11-17 23:42:28)
> I am working on a project to create a derivative of Debian. It will be 
> called Volian.
> It's mostly a personal project and it will take a while to complete, but 
> I'd like to do it properly if I'm going to do it.
> I have created the volian-team on salsa to host our changes. 
> https://salsa.debian.org/volian-team/
> as of right now I only have a fork of SELinux refpolicy where I updated 
> everything to the latest release and fixed some bugs with firewalld.
> Volian is going to be very similar to Debian, at least in the start. But 
> it will use SELinux and firewalld by default.
> I've read all of the documentation I could find on the Debian wiki, and 
> the main question I still have lingering is since
> I'll be using Debian Sids repos and then layering my own on top, what is 
> the best way to ensure that my packages take precedent over the Debian 
> ones?
> I'm not able, at the moment, to mirror Debian and alter the packages 
> effectively.
> For Example if Debian's package 
> selinux-policy-default_2.20210203-10_all.deb and Volian's with my 
> modifications are the same version how is best to handle this to ensure 
> mine is used?
> I haven't tested it but would something like 
> selinux-policy-default_2.20210203-10volian1_all.deb be proper and work 
> for my needs?

Best is to version your derived packages as minimally as possible above 
the official Debian package, and repeat that every time a new Debian 
package is released.

You might find this helpful: 
https://tracker.pureos.net/w/development/package_version_numbers/

Also make sure to read 
https://wiki.debian.org/Derivatives/Guidelines#Packages


Enjoy!

 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: signature


Reply to: