Source requirements and debian/missing-sources/ (was: "Browserified" stuff)
Quoting Martín Ferrari <tincho@tincho.org>:
I had always understood that rebuilding from source was a hard
requirement. Is this not the case any more?
I don't think that shipping a binary compiled upstream should be
allowed, so where's the line drawn?
This is an interesting question indeed.
If it is allowed for a package in main to ship a pre-compiled JS file
with only some source files under debian/missing-sources/, it could be
tempting to use all kind of pre-compiled *.c files in a package and do
not care about a proper build process. Who cares about yaccs and
bisons?
I have never heard of debian/missing-sources. What is the
policy/documentation regarding this? I have repackaged tarballs many
times to add missing sources, I did not think there was another way to
do it!
If I understand correctly, and please correct me if I'm wrong, this
directory is for sources of files that are in your source package, but
not in the binary.
Example: A source package had an embedded source copy of B.min.js
(minified, non-source), but the binary package does not have it,
because A depends on libjs-B and has the right debian/links. Then you
can put the B source into As d/m-s. If B.min.js is actually used in A,
d/m-s is not sufficient. But maybe I'm on the wrong track...
Cheers
Reply to: