Re: Maintaing an aptable archive with a potato - woody mixture
On Tue, 31 Oct 2000 10:11:10 -0800 (PST), "Sean 'Shaleh' Perry"
<shaleh@valinux.com> wrote:
>> Is there any way to keep a new debian/$PACKAGE_foo++.deb from
>> overriding
>> $COMPANY/$PACKAGE_foo.deb?
>>
>
>Your second idea will definately be easier to maintain long term.
You mean the security-resembling setup, right?
>As for taking woody packages and placing them in potato, the usual numbering
>scheme is:
>
>is foo_1.2-3.deb is from woody it becomes foo_1.2-0potato3.deb. The 3 is the
>old version from woody, the 0 is whatever the new one for potato should be.
>Any time you see this versioning scheme, you know the package is a backport.
>Security does this currently.
That seems to be a generally good idea. backporting a package is then
done by the following steps, right?
- Download and unpack woody sources.
- Copy unpacked sources to have a reference for the $COMPANY-diff.
- hack debian/control and debian/changelog to show the new version
number (foo_1.2-0potato3.deb). I can take a backported security
package as example, right?
- Satisfy build-depends (recursing until the woody system is complete
*g*)
- fakeroot debian/rules binary.
- Generate $COMPANY-diff.
Is there infrastructure to take pristine sources, Debian-diff and
$COMPANY-diff and automatically unpack $COMPANY-sources? dpkg-source
kan do this for the Debian-diff, but are multiple diffs supported as
well?
> If you MUST ensure the your package is used, a
>epoch is the strongest solution. 1:1.2 will be newer than 1.2, 1.3, etc. Only
>another epoched package could override it. Disadvantage is you have to use
>epochs for as long as that package lives. otherwise something like
>foo_1.2-13potato3.deb will almost always win. You could also use
>1.2-0<company>3, if you like, to know that the package installed you made.
How do I behave if I generate a $COMPANY version, file a wishlist bug
on my change with the $COMPANY-patch and the Debian maintainer of that
package decides to go along with us, making the $COMPANY version
obsolete? Do I have a chance to get rid of $COMPANY version if I used
an epoch to ensure $COMPANY version's use?
Greetings
Marc
--
-------------------------------------- !! No courtesy copies, please !! -----
Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header
Karlsruhe, Germany | Beginning of Wisdom " | Fon: *49 721 966 32 15
Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fax: *49 721 966 31 29
Reply to: