Re: Automatic Debug Packages
On Sat, Aug 08 2009, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> [ Moving to debian-policy ]
> Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 31 2009, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>>> Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>>>> We do not want to have different helper package start inventing
>>>> a helper specific way of building ddebs, with no clear standard tha
>>>> they are following.
>>>> While archive coverage is nice, ensuring that a ddeb is
>>>> properly defined, and that all the different ways of creating ddebs are
>>>> consistent, should happen first.
>>> OK, so you mean I should document the ddeb format (which is that of
>>> .deb packages) and possibly include it in policy? That makes sense, if
>>> you want that I'll propose a patch for policy (note that udebs are not
>>> documented though).
>> But regular packages are not creating udebs; and the whole idea
>> behind "automated" ddeb creation is that the ./debian/rules file
>> optionally creates ddebs. Since this affects the majority of packages,
>> I think we need to be clear up front about ddeb creation.
> I've documented the .ddeb format in the wiki page  ("DDeb Format",
> which is short since the format is basically that of .debs). Do we
> really need this to be documented in policy?
Not if that is all that is. So ddebs are just -dbg packages
renamed to foo_version_arch.ddeb (you do not need ddeb in the name
since they are called .ddebs.)
The wiki does not seem to impose any additional rules on the
ddebs (I assume that all the restrictions on a normal package still
Seems like then all that is needed is to build the package as
normal, and after the dpkg invocation to build the package, one just
adds a call to mv. This is simple.
The link to the wiki page was missing
The meek shall inherit the earth, but not its mineral rights. Paul Getty
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C