On 2018-01-08 20:36 -0500, Michael Stone wrote: > On Mon, Jan 08, 2018 at 12:09:09PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > > Top-posting to just say +1, and that I was going to reply with much the > > same. > > > > I don't even think the requirement for the bootstrap profiles to not > > functionally change the packages is necessary, but it's the way the folks > > working on bootstrappability have chosen to do it, so it's their call. But > > that's definitely not a binding precedent on other build profiles that might > > be implemented. > > How, then, would you tell by looking at the package name+version which kind > of package you have? The package header says what profiles it was built with. The package name+version doesn't change - that's part of the point. No-one should be trying to put more than one instance of a package built with different profiles in one repo at one time because stuff will break. But a downstream distro could enable a profile and build everything that way and that should be fine. > If you're going to change the name or version string > anyway, why use some complicated profile system instead of just applying a > patch? It's not really complicated. It's just a mechanism for variant package builds which is formalised in dpkg and related tools (without changing the package name/version). And the reason why you'd use it for something like this is that it lets you upstream patches (which change dependencies) in a reasonably clean way. Clearly a downstream distro can instead maintain patches, but we encourage upstreaming in general and this mechanism allows that. Wookey -- Principal hats: Linaro, Debian, Wookware, ARM http://wookware.org/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature