Re: dpkg-source v2
Colin Walters wrote:
> On Mon, 2002-07-22 at 13:16, Joey Hess wrote:
> > Colin Walters wrote:
> > > I see your point. I think I agree. So I'll change it so it does by
> > > default build a diff of the unpacked source directory; it will then be
> > > dropped in debian/patches/00debian.patch.
> >
> > That's great. (Aside from the sucky name, but foo. Well, couldn't you
> > use debian/patches/debian; if you're doing an alphanumeric sort that
> > will come after any [0-9][0-9]\w patches maintainers create.)
>
> Ok, debian/patches/debian.patch it is.
I notice that perhaps you wanted it to come _first_ -- I can see
possible value in it coming either first or last; if it comes first you
don't have to worry about the debian diff being dependent on other
diffs. If it comes last, you don't have to worry about changes in the
debian diff breaking other diffs. Dunno. I suppose putting it in the
"middle" like debian.patch allows the maintainer to decide and have
00patch or z0patch as they prefer.
> > Yuck. I have a few upstream debianized packages; making them native is
> > not a very appealing route, and sticking with v1 will only work so long.
>
> Well, there is of course a third option; remove the debian/ directory
> manually from the upstream .orig.tar.gz. I don't like that option
> though, because it sucks to have to change the .orig.tar.gz; people
> verifying the md5sum will have to go to extra trouble.
Right, I want to see less of that, not more, with the new source format.
I was hoping it would be entirely eliminated with the new source format
except for packages that have a tarball that does not create a directory
at all, and maybe upstream source in cruft like .rar files.
> > What if it used a rule like this:
> >
> > For each tarball:
> > If there is a colon in the tarball's filename, unpack that tarball
> > in package-version/<bit-after-colon>.
> > Else if there is no colon, (and there must only be one tarball with no
> > colon), unpack it in package-version/.
>
> Ok, I agree. I think I know this is the correct answer because it makes
> the code simpler.
Yay! Pseudo-code triumphs once again. :-)
By the way where does the xml-foo that you were threatening about
earlier come in to all this?
--
see shy jo
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: