Re: Question about Debian Policy 6.1
On Wed, Mar 17, 2004 at 02:10:03AM +0100, Carlos Perelló Marín wrote:
> Hi I have a doubt about the point 6.1, it says:
>
> "These scripts are the files preinst, postinst, prerm and postrm in the
> control area of the package. They must be proper executable files; if
> they are scripts (which is recommended), they must start with the usual
> #! convention. They should be readable and executable by anyone, and not
> world-writable."
>
> From there, I understand that they should have 755 permissions, right?
In the .deb, not in the source package. The "control area" is the
control.tar.gz part of the .deb.
> I fixed the packages I'm packaging as part of my NewMaintainer process
> when my sponsor noted it to me and also I filed a bug against gedit
> because it does not have the execution bits (#237091),
I've followed up to that bug saying that it should be closed.
> but I was talking about it with another NewMaintainer friend because
> his package does not have the execution bit and after some research we
> saw that the .deb package have them with the execution bit, we think
> it's dpkg-build which fixes it.
There's no such tool, and I'm not sure which one you actually mean.
dh_installdeb sets the execute bit in packages that use debhelper;
packages that don't use debhelper generally set it by hand with chmod.
> My question is... if dpkg-build "fixes" it automatically, should we
> change the execution bit inside debian/ directory? (lintian does not
> detect it as a policy violation and debhelper creates the templates
> without the execution bit)
It's entirely irrelevant, but generally you shouldn't, since if the
files in debian/ are in the .diff.gz (as is usual), then dpkg-source
will not preserve the execute bit when other people extract your source
package. It's better to be consistent.
Cheers,
--
Colin Watson [cjwatson@flatline.org.uk]
Reply to: