Re: Proposal new source archive format
On Mon, 1 May 2000, Ben Collins wrote:
> I agree, reversing patches is complete silly. What if I patch
> configure.in, and then run autoconf (makes for a hugely smaller diff)?
> With the mentioned method, I would now have a debian patch for
> configure.in, but be forced to have a HUGE configure patch in the
> debianization diff. Gross. Better to leave .orig.tar.gz pristine, and let
> the maintainers worry about patches. We should get away from
> automatically diff'ing the original source to create a debian .diff.gz
> file. I can't count the numerous problems with this, including not being
> able to include binary files, permissions on the debian/* files not being
> carried over (look at the glibc package for a terrible workaround that had
> to be done to get around this), and then there is the diff-of-a-diff
> thing.
dbs(my patch system) supports 'excludes' that are used during the patch
generation. Maybe we need something like that for this.
----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----
Version: 3.12
GCS d- s: a-- c+++ UL++++ P+ L++++ !E W+ M o+ K- W--- !O M- !V PS--
PE++ Y+ PGP++ t* 5++ X+ tv b+ D++ G e h*! !r z?
-----END GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
----BEGIN PGP INFO----
Adam Heath <doogie@debian.org> Finger Print | KeyID
67 01 42 93 CA 37 FB 1E 63 C9 80 1D 08 CF 84 0A | DE656B05 PGP
AD46 C888 F587 F8A3 A6DA 3261 8A2C 7DC2 8BD4 A489 | 8BD4A489 GPG
-----END PGP INFO-----
Reply to: