Re: maybe a (long-term) solution to the translations problem andothers
On Sat, 1 Sep 2001, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> And what version number is this incrementally updated .deb
> file going to have? Remember, the control.tar.gz file has the version
> encoded (as does the changelog in the data.tar,gz).
I wouldn't change the version. After all, the main contents of the package
haven't changed, so there is no need to upgrade for people who already
have that package installed. The translated description will show up on
their systems on the next update (as would a new version), and the
translated debconf templates will show up when the user upgrades the
package after a new version has been released by the maintainer, which is
not too late if he already installed the package before the translation
became available.
The only drawback is that proxies need to treat .debs like regular files
again, since they cannot expect them to never change.
> And what about
> the MD5Sum in the dsc file? If I get the dsc file from one archive,
> the md5sum won't match the .deb from a site where someone has added
> another translation to the package.
The .dsc file does not contain an md5sum for the .deb, only the .changes
file does. I think I have solved the checksum problem by requiring that
each member of the ar file be signed separately (We can also drop the
signature from the .changes file when this has been established, since the
.dsc carries its own signature).
Since I just had a sleepless night, a first draft of the proposal is ready
for the wider public to enjoy. Stay tuned...
Simon
--
GPG public key available from http://phobos.fs.tum.de/pgp/Simon.Richter.asc
Fingerprint: DC26 EB8D 1F35 4F44 2934 7583 DBB6 F98D 9198 3292
Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into your ~/.signature to help me spread!
Reply to: