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

Re: Ok to use upstream doumentation as-is (i.e. not regenerate)?

On Sun, 05 Jun 2011 16:49:14 +0200, Joachim Breitner <nomeata@debian.org> wrote:
Non-text part: multipart/signed
> if I do regenerate the files for shipping (or don’t ship them in the
> binary packages), is it ok to leave the upstream-generated files in
> the .orig.tar.gz, even though I have no hard guarantee that they are
> built from these sources (assuming I have no reason to assume that they
> are not), or should every such .orig.tar.gz be re-packaged and stripped
> of all generated files?

Personally I think overwriting files in .orig.tar.gz is does not require
re-packing. If it did, then every package that calls autoreconf or
equivalent is buggy.  Saving the extra complication of saving and
restoring files (or just deleting the generated ones in the clean step)
doesn't seem to me be worth the losing pristine original source.


Attachment: pgpA6BNLW1pC9.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: