Re: Status on ddeb support in Debian
May I suggest you add:
What is it?
===========
* ddeb's are Debian packages with the extenstion .ddeb that
contain debugging symbols and are built implicitly.
- A package foo_1.23.deb will receive a corresponding
foo_1.23-dbgsym.ddeb package.
- ddebs are built automatically by dh_strip.
Or such. The above info is deduced from random bits. I haven't
really read the whole thread closely, so my blurp above might
be wrong.
*t
Am 29.06.2015 um 18:17 schrieb Niels Thykier:
> Here is another short update on ddeb support in Debian.
>
> What is missing?
> ================
>
> * Only known blocker is missing archive/dak support.
>
> * Once DAK support is implemented, I intend to enable ddebs
> unconditionally in debhelper.
>
> Where are we?
> =============
>
> * debhelper in unstable can now build ddebs - disabled by default.
> - Test with env DH_BUILD_DDEBS=1, but please don't upload ddebs to
> any Debian archive.
>
> * lintian gives no remarks to the new ddebs.
>
> * dh_strip can now be asked to /not/ build ddebs, if your package for
> some reason cannot use them.
> - Known cases are: linux (build-id based debug symbols not supported)
> and possibly other kernels
>
>
> How can I help?
> ===============
>
> * Please review the documentation in dh_strip(1) and help me improve it
> where needed.
>
> * [Toolchain maintainers] If you maintain that might need to handle
> ddebs /differently/ than a regular ddeb (e.g. reprepro), please
> look into implementing that.
>
> * [Derivatives] Please consider upgrading your infrastructure /
> tooling if/where needed.
>
> FAQ
> ===
>
> Q: What if my distribution/use-case is ready to build ddebs?
> A: Please import debhelper 9.20150628 with the attached patch
> cherry-picked.
> - Note, if your developers/users moonlight as DDs, please remind
> them to build their Debian packages in a clean unstable chroot
> with the regular debhelper! They should be doing that already,
> but a reminder cannot hurt.
>
> Q: What happens if I upload a ddeb to unstable?
> A: Either dak unconditionally rejects your upload (if you are lucky)
> OR it ends up in NEW (if you are unlucky). Note that once your
> package is in NEW, subsequent upload will /also/ end up in NEW.
> Even if they do /not/ include the ddeb package.
>
> Thanks,
> ~Niels
>
>
Reply to: