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

Re: Feedback on 3.0 source format problems


Quoting Ian Jackson (2017-01-09 18:33:51)
> Johannes Schauer writes ("Re: Feedback on 3.0 source format problems"):
> > Sbuild could do this cleanup itself if there was a way to
> > automatically determine whether the user would like their tree to be
> > patches applied or unapplied.
> This would have to be some kind of (perhaps package-specific) personal
> configuration, I think.

is that what debian/source/local-options is about?

The only docs I find about it are:


> > I do not even know of a way to determine upfront whether a source
> > tree is patches applied or unapplied (that check has to be
> > independent of the source format).
> This is, in the general case, clearly impossible.  As a simple
> example, consider the result of the following:
>   # .oO{ somepackage is broken }
>   dgit clone somepackage && cd somepackage
>   # .oO{ hrm I wonder why it is broken - oh there is only one patch }
>   # .oO{ oh the breakage is in the busted patch "add zorkmids" }
>   git revert -n :/'add zorkmids'
>   git commit
> Now the tree is exactly identical to a patches-unapplied tree.  But
> the user wanted it to drop the patch.  Tools should not reapply it.

Then maybe I don't understand or there is at least some confusion about what
pdebuild is doing. At least from James' email I understand that it is trying to
somehow restore the original state (whether it was patches applied or patches
unapplied) by calling:

     $ dpkg-source --before-build .
     $ dpkg-source -b .
     $ dpkg-source --after-build .

It would be great if somebody could clarify all this and maybe help get us to a
state where we can have the involved tools all do the same sensible thing
independent of the source package format and packaging workflow.


cheers, josch

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: signature

Reply to: