Re: Bug#437392: debhelper: subroutine "isnative" in Dh_Lib.pm is confused by NMU of native package
On Tue, Aug 14, 2007 at 01:38:04PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Bart Martens wrote:
> > Policy does not explicitly state that the presence/absence of a
> > "debian_revision" or that the presence/absence of hyphen(s) "-" indicate
> > whether or not the package is a "native Debian package".
> It is optional; if it isn't present then the <upstream_version>
> may not contain a hyphen. This format represents the case where
> a piece of software was written specifically to be turned into a
> Debian package, and so there is only one "debianisation" of it
> and therefore no revision indication is required.
> This strongly implies that debian native packages don't use debian_revision.
That's why it is in the normal case.
> > > I don't know why the
> > > developers reference choses to ignore that.
Because it may be more important to be able to identify an NMU from the
version number than to be able to identify a native package from the
> > Policy and developer's reference do not contradict explicitly on the
> > version numbering of an NMU of a native package.
> The developer's reference chose to ignore or change a longstanding practice
> of never using debian revision numbers in native packages. Changing this
> breaks software that has relied on this practice for ten or more years.
> Not just debhelper, but debstd and cdbs, and who knows what else.
How does it break them?