Re: maint-guide update (pbuilder, linda, orig.tar.gz etc.)
On Mon, Dec 27, 2004 at 10:20:42AM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
> Osamu Aoki <osamu@debian.org> wrote:
>
> > or specifically check correctness for the following sentences.
> > (I welcome English grammar correction too.)
>
> Here come some comments:
... (Thanks for correcting articles.)
> > Here, you must have the upstream tar ball as orig.tar.gz file in the
> > parent directory.
>
> I would write: In order to get a non-native package with a diff.gz, you
> must have...
Good point. I will think about this.
> > Usually, this tar ball should untar to a source tree
> > rooting from a directory with a name <packagename>-<upstream_version>/.
> > In this cases, orig.tar.gz source file can be obtained by simply rename
> > upstream tar ball to the original file name
> > <packagename>_<upstream_version>.orig.tar.gz . Please note that the 2
> > changes exist between source tree directory name and the tar file name:
> >
> > * Change hyphen "-" to underscore "_"
> > * Add "orig." before "tar.gz."
>
> You can consider adding a link here that refers to the discussion of
> orig.tar.gz files in the developer's reference, oh, no, it's not yet
> there (see #278524).
That was the information I was looking for. For maint-guide, repackage
issues is best left as remote reference, I think. Initially pointing
this bug and later pointing Developer treference section.
> Maybe later. This would also provide an explanation
> for the "Usually" at the beginning of the paragraph above, namely when
> it should unpack into <packagename>-<upstream-version>.orig/.
Yes.
> > The dh_make command usually takes care creation of orig.tar.gz file.
>
> I would leave this out here, because we are in the section about
> updating the package to a new version.
I thought so too. I think internal reference to
http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/maint-guide/ch-first.en.html#s-dh_make
may be better reminder.
> Alternatively,
> + The dh_make command usually takes care of the creation of the orig.tar.gz file.
Maybe adding few words in 2.4 may be more appropriate. I will use your
expression and think about it later.
Osamu
Reply to: