Re: New source package formats now available
Gerfried Fuchs <email@example.com> writes:
> * Raphael Hertzog <firstname.lastname@example.org> [2009-11-23 09:50:15 CET]:
>> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
>> > Actually, I feel rather to convert my packages to 3.0 (native) + quilt.
>> > The way quilt is implied in 3.0 (quilt) doesn't seem to be helpful (to
>> > me).
>> Yay for reuploading the full tarball for each revision! I'd rather you
>> keep using 1.0 instead of doing this...
> But 1.0 won't give me orig.tar.bz2 support. And your plan is to kill
> off 1.0 and implicit convert it to 3.0 (quilt) so "keep using 1.0" would
> still mean having to change stuff in the package.
>> The automatic patch now features DEP-3 headers by default. The NMUer can
>> rename it and edit the headers easily. If he wants to create one patch
>> per feature, he can simply rebuild the source package after having applied
>> each patch.
> Have you tried rebuilding the source package after having applied a
> patch in wesnoth? Or OpenOffice.org? Or nexuiz-data? Or fillets-ng-data?
>> For each patch:
>> - apply patch
>> - dpkg-buildpackage -S
>> - rename debian/patches/debian-changes-<ver> into something else
>> and edit its headers
>> - fix debian/patches/series
>> Note: this works only if quilt is not installed (or if you ensure
>> dpkg-source is called with --without-quilt which you currently can't pass
>> via dpkg-buildpackage).
> Ah yes, again different workflows required - so we actually do need a
> README.Source to warn people to not having quilt installed when working
> with 3.0 (quilt) format? This sounds a bit backwards and strange, to be
Full ACK. There should be a dpkg-edit-patch, dpkg-rename-patch,
dpkg-import-patch, ... to hide the difference of with or without quilt
if dpkg wants to keep going that way. I suggested something like that
in the past but the dpkg team didn't like it.
Or at a minimum dpkg should catch when a patch was manually renamed
while quilt is used and repair that. I.e. make just renaming work even
with quilt being used. I consider this a bug.
>> It's new, it's just that we haven't developed the toolset around it. I
>> always expected that people would start developing new tools à la
>> devscripts to make it easier for some specific scenario.
> Expecting others to jump the wagon isn't something you should depend
> on, you are well adviced to be ready to do the work yourself in case
> your expectations are over the top. :)
>> Well, everything has a learning curve. It's normal to have to learn once.
>> The point of README.source was to document stuff that not all DD are
>> supposed to know. Knowledge of the new source format will be common
>> in the near future.
> Given that there seems to be different workflows needed and required
> depending on what packages one has installed I still see the need for
> that, to be honest ...
Yes, but not in every pakage. At most a link to a file provided by