On Fri, Oct 25, 2002 at 01:35:53PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote: > On Fri, Oct 25, 2002 at 10:21:39PM +1000, Chris Leishman wrote: <snip> > > 2. Is it a bug if a package doesn't use a pristine upstream tarball? > > I don't think so. There are frequently good reasons for it (e.g. the > removal of non-DFSG-free code). If you file bugs about this then be > prepared to have them closed with "yes, but it has to be this way". Ok - that makes sense. Perhaps we need to differentiate between an original binary (identical to upstream) and a modified one so that this sort of confusion doesn't occur? Though it's probably not worth the hassle... Regards, Chris
Attachment:
pgp3p0buJgVes.pgp
Description: PGP signature