Re: Survey: git packaging practices / repository format
On 28.05.19 19:31, Simon McVittie wrote:
Hi,
> Debian Linux kernel
> ===================
>
> Tree contains: an incomplete debian/ directory, notably without d/control,
> and no upstream source
> Changes to upstream source are: d/patches only
> Baseline upstream: changelog version => .orig tarball
> Patches managed by: ???
> Special build tool: there is a pre-build step to generate d/control
I'm handling the kernel very differently (actually the offical packages
never actually built at my site), similar to what I've described in
my other mails - layered branches:
* layer 0: upstream tag (linus or greg)
* layer 1: generic patches for making upstream's 'make dep-pkg' work
with usual debian workflows (eg. not creating debian/rules
from there anymore, but a generic one instead)
* layer 2: dist and target specific customizations (changelos, .config,
etc ...)
The whole thing is again is built via dck-buildpackage (dpkg-
buildpackage should also work, but I never called it manually anymore,
since i've wrote dck-buildpackage).
Note that I don't even try to create some one-fits-all superpackage for
all archs, flavours, etc. - instead I'm using separate layer 2 branches
for that.
(for maintaining lots of kernel configs based on some meta config, I've
got a separate tool)
--mtx
--
Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
Free software and Linux embedded engineering
info@metux.net -- +49-151-27565287
Reply to: