Re: Problems with the current source packaging scheme
>>"Jim" == Jim Pick <email@example.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
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:firstname.lastname@example.org>
Mobile, Alabama USA <url:http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
Trouble? e-mail to email@example.com .