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

Re: dpkg-source v2



On Sun, Oct 06, 2002 at 01:15:45PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> > So maybe a better idea is to just let you have different upstream sources
> > with varying names and versions, and to expect you to tell dpkg-source etc
> > when that's the case, and give it the details it needs. 
> The reason I didn't go this route is becuase it isn't very friendly to a
> non-pool layout (or even just having a bunch of Debian source packages
> in the same directory, not necessarily in an archive context).  

That's trivially worked around by having:

	glibc_2.2.5.orig.tar.gz
	glibc_linuxthreads_1.2.3.orig.tar.gz
	glibc_2.2.5-14.2.diff.gz
	glibc_2.2.5-14.2.dsc

where you replace <foo>_*.orig.tar.gz with <src>_<foo>_*.orig.tar.gz
when <foo> != <src>. So that doesn't concern me at all.

> I kind of have the feeling this problem would bite someone
> eventually, but maybe the space optimization is worth it;

In particular, you don't have to worry about trading off the space
optimisation.

> > ] glibc (2.2.5-14.3; linuxthreads 1.2.3) unstable; urgency=low
> Yeah, that's a pretty reasonable way of specifying different versions. 

> Actually, now that I've thought about it a bit more, it seems a little
> tricky to actually achieve the space optimization you propose through
> this.  Say that the linuxthreads glibc plugin changes.  How do you tell
> dpkg-buildpackage to not include the glibc .orig.tar.gz in the upload
> too?

Well, the easy answer would be that you don't. You waste your bandwidth
and upload it, then the archive software notices that it's a duplicate,
and that it's the exact same file, and ignores it. This happens now anyway
(and has to thanks to the way we're handling the security updates),
so it's no big deal, and still saves the mirrors.

> I guess maybe dpkg-genchanges could compare the new and last
> versions for glibc, and not include it in the .changes if they're the
> same...seems a bit kludgy to me, but I can't think of a better way. 

Or you could just add an argument to tell dpkg-buildpackage and
dpkg-genchanges explicitly which upstream sources to include in the
.changes.

Cheers,
aj

-- 
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

 ``If you don't do it now, you'll be one year older when you do.''



Reply to: