Re: Correct way to do binary-only NMU?

[Itai Zukerman <zukerman@math-hat.com>]

> You fall between two chairs - as noted in 7.4.3:
> 
>     What if you are simply recompiling the package?  In this case, the
>     process is different for porters than it is for non-porters, as
>     mentioned above.  If you are not a porter and are doing an NMU
>     that simply requires a recompile (i.e., a new shared library is
>     available to be linked against, a bug was fixed in debhelper),
>     there must still be a changelog entry; therefore, there will be a
>     patch.  If you are a porter, you are probably just doing a binary
>     NMU.  (Note: this leaves out in the cold porters who have to do
>     recompiles -- chalk it up as a weakness in how we maintain our
>     archive.)

I've always found these binary NMUs confusing.  There are two things
I'm stuck on:

1.  If all you're doing is a compile for a new architecture, then why
is it necessary to bump the package version?  If you modify *anything*
in debian/* (for example, the Architecture or Build-Depends fields in
debian/control), then it seems to me this isn't a binary-only NMU.

2.  Suppose you bump the package version but nothing in debian/*
changes.  Then to re-build the package from source I need to run a
special command; "debian/rules build" won't give me quite the same
thing, right?  So I need to know how the binary was built to compile
it properly myself.

Just trying to understand binary NMUs...

-itai