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

Re: mplayer, the time has come

A Mennucc <mennucc1@debian.org> wrote:

[please, please repair your quoting mechanism. Done that for you in this mail].

> Henning Makholm wrote:
>>  That is not a valid reason to pretend it is a native package. The
>>  correct thing to do is to create a new .orig.tar.gz with the offending
>>  files removed from it, but keep the rest of the .orig.tar.gz
>>  unchanged. Debian changes and package infrastructure should still go
>>  in a .diff.gz, and the package version should consist of an upstream
>>  version with a separate Debian revision.
> I object to this
> a file   mplayer....orig.tar.gz      is, as the name says, the original
> distributed source

No, it isn't there are lots of packages that have removed non-free files
from their orig.tar.gz files that way. There might even be packages for
which no upstream archive in tar.gz form exists. Please see 


and the discussions referenced therein. I wrote this bug report in order
to enforce a policy that orig.tar.gz files *should* be pristine as
possible. But the fact that this is necessary clearly shows that it is
not a requirement.

> distributing my modified tar.gz disguising it as the upstream original one
> would be cause of confusion

That's why you have to document this in debian/README.Debian or
debian/README.Debian-source. But an orig.gar.gz file is just one
technical part of a Debian source package, it doesn's say anything about
pristine or repackaged.

Regards, Frank
Frank Küster
Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer

Reply to: