Re: Uploaded glibc-pre2.1 2.0.106-0.2 (hurd-i386) to master
At 23:01 -0600 1998-12-21, Gordon Matzigkeit wrote:
This is my first upload, so if I've dealt incorrectly with any policy
issues, please let me know. I've acted on my (limited) understanding
of Debian policy and maintainership instructions.
Your only real error was the source package, what you need to do with
glibc is unpack the main sources and add-ons into a
glibc-pre2.1-<version>.orig directory, then copy that to
glibc-pre2.1-<version>, and place the debian/ directory in the latter
directory. Then dpkg-source -b will do the right thing, otherwise, it
assumes a Debian-specific package and builds a .tar.gz instead of a
.orig.tar.gz.
This upload was only done to provide the Debian GNU/Hurd folks with a
working binary package, not to change the course of glibc-pre2.1
development. That's why I used `0.2' as the package version number.
I also released a `0.1' version, but didn't upload it to master.
I would have preferred being notified that you were planning to
upload, I wanted to be careful with glibc-pre2.1 uploads until sparc
was frozen for slink.
It was my intention to solicit feedback from the debian-hurd people,
then, after arriving on something stable, to report the Hurd-specific
changes we need to make back to Joel. I didn't want to involve him at
this point because things are still quite in flux.
I do read debian-hurd and help-hurd, BTW.
I thought that attempting a port to a non-supported architecture was a
legitimate reason for an NMU, but I may just have been misreading the
spirit of the Debian maintainer's guide.
Normally it would be, I think Christian's objection is mainly that
the sources for the current sparc libc6 binary packages (almost) got
stepped on again.
I moved the contents of this upload into a 'hurd-libc' subdirectory
in incoming so it won't be installed.
--
Joel Klecker (aka Espy) <URL:http://web.espy.org/>
<URL:mailto:jk@espy.org> <URL:mailto:espy@debian.org>
Debian GNU/Linux PowerPC -- <URL:http://www.debian.org/ports/powerpc/>
Reply to: