Re: Should dpkg-source -x list patches (Re: How to handle Debian patches)
Le Mon, May 19, 2008 at 10:25:35PM +0200, Bernd Eckenfels a écrit :
> In article <[🔎] alpine.DEB.1.10.0805192043220.12434@wr-linux02> you wrote:
> > give a hint about this. If patches are "hidden" anywhere in the upstream
> > code some developers fail to realise this and my suggestion might help
> > noticing this fact.
>
> The debian Diff is not hiding patches in the upstream code. It is the
> canonical place to publish them (at least for some (most?) of the debian
> packages following policy).
Hi all,
If we take openssl as an example, we can see that many .pl files are
modified. A quick inspection shows that for most of them the only change
is the path to Perl in the first line. The only way to know if it is the
case for all is to look at all of them one by one. The Debian diff.gz
file is a technical way to apply the Debian modifications to the
original sources, but it seems to me a very suboptimal way to publish
patches of the quality level that one would expect for his own software.
To keep on the openssl example, the patched .pl are dispersed within the
.diff.gz file. That is, different logical units are mixed, and to submit
one of them would necessitate to generate a new patch that is not a
contiguous extract of the original diff.gz. This is how I understand -
and agree with - the claim that patches are "hidden" in the diff.gz.
Have a nice day
--
Charles Plessy
http://charles.plessy.org
Wakō, Saitama, Japan
Reply to: