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

Re: Problems with the current source packaging scheme


>>"Jim" == Jim Pick <jim@jimpick.com> writes:

Lars> * upstream sources not preserved bit-for-bit; need to be repackage,
Lars> which can destroy upstream digital signatures, and makes it more
Lars> difficult to check that .orig.tar.gz and upstream sources are the
Lars> same

Jim> The only reason they currently get repackaged is so that they can
Jim> be easily stored in the archive.  If we just "wrap" them in
Jim> something else, it accomplishes the same objective without being
Jim> so darn destructive.
	I think Bruce and Susan had brought up the issue about Debian
 repackaging upstream sources unnecessarily (one may need to change
 dpkg-source to handle, say, make-3.75.tar.gz that unpacks into
 make-3.75, and have the modified Debian sources reside in
 make-3.75.debian/. So, if the upstream version is reasonable, we can
 just use it directly (applies to all packages following GNU archive

	We don't need to wrap them (unless I misunderstand what was
 said), just carry the upstream source untouched.


 The fact, in short, is that freedom, to be meaningful in an organized
 society, must consist of an amalgam of hierarchy of freedoms and
 restraints. Samuel Hendel
Manoj Srivastava               <url:mailto:srivasta@acm.org>
Mobile, Alabama USA            <url:http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>

TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .

Reply to: