Re: how orig should orig.tar.gz be?
On Mon, Jan 03, 2000 at 12:11:59PM +0100, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> stuff, etc). I am speaking about "normal" packages. I am allways using the
> upstream source, renaming it to orig.tar.gz and the diffs are created
> relative to this source. Now for reference I looked into other packages for
> reference and noted that some people repackage the upstream source, where it
> is not necessary. Easily notable when you look at the owner and group of the
> orig source.
>
> Is this ok, prefered or not prefered? I allways understood the docs (and
> policy and whatever, which I obviously did not read in every detail, so
> please do not answer "debian-policy" or "debian-packaging manual") that the
> original upstream source should be used whenever possible. I know that ie
> xfree does it differently, but this is probably since xfree contains several
> upstream source files and uses a very clever concept of applying patches.
> But it seems every source package I am looking at now is repacked, are all
> my packages wrong?
>
> Please help us resolve this dispute, I'd really like to know what is correct.
As original as possible is preferred. It is necessary to repack the
original source if it contains binaries, pipes, or other things which
upset diff/dpkg-source.
Adam Heath has a new source packaging system where the .orig.tar.gz
contains the real upstream source (unchanged) plus a series of upstream
patches. The rules files unpacks the source, applies the patches, etc.
This seems a reasonable exception to the rule, since the real pristine
source IS in there.
Hamish
--
Hamish Moffatt VK3SB. CCs of replies on mailing lists are welcome.
Reply to: