Re: porting a package
On Wed, Sep 08, 1999 at 02:48:43PM +0200, Fernando Sanchez wrote:
> Hello,
> I have found that a package for which I am not the maintainer
> (ocaml) is not being built for i386 architecture in its latest versions (it
> is ok for powerpc and alpha). I have tried to compile it for i386 and there
> have been no problems, so I'm thinking about uploading it as binary-only as
> it is explained in Debian Developer's Reference. Questions:
>
> - is there any problem in doing this? Should I report it to someone, or is
> it ok if I just upload ocaml_2.02-5_i386.deb as usual?
>
> - resulting package is not totally "lintian-clean": it complains about a
> lacking man page and man pages placement not being FHS compliant. Should I
> patch it and report it as a bug, wait for the maintainer upload which
> corrects the bug and port it then to i386 architecture, or is it better if I
> solve the problem now and upload it as binary-only?
If you port a package (ie, simply compile it for an architecture which it
is not compiled for) you can upload it without problems given a few guide
lines:
1) You build the package with the -B options so there is no source and no
binary-all packages uploaded with it.
2) You did not have to modify _any_ files to get it to compile. Don't
worry if it's not lintian clean, file a bug report or something for that.
However, it's very important that you don't upload a package that you had
to modify to get to compile. If it requires some patches to compile on
that arch then send the patches to the maintainer and let them include it
in the next upload.
Ben
Reply to: