Re: package naming for working directories, tarfiles and diff files
Bill Mitchell wrote:
> current alternative description
> ------- ----------- -----------
>1. package/ package/ original package after tar
I am assuming you mean after the _maintainer_ extracts the original tar
>2. package.orig/ original package renamed
..assuming once again that you mean the maintainer renames the original
>3. package/ package.debian/ original package modified for
..and that this is the directory that the maintainer would work in,
while developing the Debian version.
>4. package.diff package.debian.diff diff -r -c -P output
>5. package.tar package.debian.tar tarfile of debian version of
..and that this is the package that would actually go into the
distribution - the one that Debian users see.
After quite a bit of thought (and trying to get my brain to understand
exactly what you meant) I think this may not be such a bad idea in
theory. I personally like this structure; it's clean, very descriptive,
and clearly marks Debian-specific packages. Well, it's clean and very
descriptive _because_ it clearly marks Debian-specific packages.
>As I see it, these alternative naming conventions have two advantages:
>1. They reinforce the idea that the debian package is an offshoot of
> a centrally-maintained package with wider distribution.
Yes, which may be important for at least two reasons:
a) People particularly want to use the Debian package
b) People particularly want to avoid the Debian package.
>2. If the original tarfile is extracted a second time, it just
> overwrites the files it produced on the original extraction instead
> of clobbering the files with the debian changes.
Except that you mentioned renaming the original package package.orig.
Then there would be a 'package/' 'package.orig' and 'package.debian'
directory. Did I understand this correctly?
>Also I think it would be worthwhile to make the tarfile from the parent
>directory with the command "tar cvf package.debian.diff package.debian".
>That is, include the diff file in the tarfile. This isn't covered one
>way or the other in the packaging guidelines I've seen.
But we should append '.tar' onto the tarfile, though, right?
email@example.com Use Debian Linux