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

Re: large number of source package version problems in the archive



On Thu 24 Sep 1998, James A. Treacy wrote:

> > I believe part of the problem is from cross-platform uploads
> > that include new source..
> > 
> Probably. Since people are supposed to be able to get the source to
> the version of the package in the archive, we need to fix this.

The way I do uploads for Alpha where patches were necessary, is to only
upload the binary, and to submit a patch to the BTS. This way
(a) the package maintainer gets a chance to integrate the patch in the
    way he sees fit (e.g. maybe he can see a cleaner way of fixing something),
(b) the source for the NMU binary can be reconstructed from the standard
    sources plus the patch from the bug report.
I find this works very well.  The only drawback is where the maintainer
weeks if not months in integrating the patch.

> > Why are you looking in non-free/source for something that's in main/source?
> > 
> >     James> Couldn't find libjpeg6b_*.dsc in
> >     James> dists/unstable/non-free/source in archive found in
> >     James> /debian/home/treacy/ftp/dists/unstable/main/source/libs/libjpeg6b_6b-1.dsc
> > 
> > Same here.. This seems to maybe be a bug in your script? :)
> > 
> Not at all. I am guilty of not including the name of the package though. Both
> gimp-nonfree and libjpeg-gif are non-free packages whose source is in main.

It's strange you find something in someone's home directory while it's
available in the main archive... I'd consider that a bug. First look
through the main archive, then through the rest of the system.


Paul Slootman
-- 
home: paul@wurtel.demon.nl | work: paul@murphy.nl | debian: paul@debian.org
http://www.wurtel.demon.nl | Murphy Software,   Enschede,   the Netherlands


Reply to: