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

Re: Packaging best practice when upstream git contains more directory levels than the upstream tarball?

* Axel Beckert <abe@debian.org> schrieb:

> Upstream tarballs are preferable because:
> * It's use is recommended in the Developer Reference

recommended essentially means optional.

> * It's clear how the tarball was generated -- built by upstream and
>   downloaded
> * Distributions which build the software on package/port installation
>   time (like e.g. FreeBSD and Gentoo) rely a lot on the Debian
>   mirrors -- but only if we use the original upstream tarball.(*)

FreeBSD and Gentoo have their own mirror infrastructures,
I don't think that they rely on Debian in any way.

> Tarballs built from a git repo which includes the upstream git repo as
> a remote git repo are preferable because:
> * They may include more files you possibly need for using
>   automake/autoconf foo or to rebuild other stuff which is prebuilt in
>   the official upstream tarball.(**)

That's one of the reasons I don't like upstream tarballs at all,
if an usable VCS repo is available. I usually regenerate everything
(at least the autocrap stuff) and therefore want all those files
out of the way first.

Can't we build packages *directly* from an git tag without having
an upstream/orig tarball at all ?

 Enrico Weigelt, metux IT service -- http://www.metux.de/

 phone:  +49 36207 519931  email: weigelt@metux.de
 mobile: +49 151 27565287  icq:   210169427         skype: nekrad666
 Embedded-Linux / Portierung / Opensource-QM / Verteilte Systeme

Reply to: