Re: Taking over different packages with a single source package
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: Taking over different packages with a single source package
- From: Justin Pryzby <email@example.com>
- Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:17:52 -0500
- Message-id: <20051228151751.GA30193@andromeda>
- In-reply-to: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- References: <5o4up-5nLemail@example.com> <5o4up-5nLfirstname.lastname@example.org> <5o4up-5nLemail@example.com> <5o4up-5nLfirstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com>
On Wed, Dec 28, 2005 at 12:48:09PM +0100, Danai SAE-HAN (?$B4ZC#BQ) wrote:
> Op maa 26 dec 2005 18:40:13 +0100 schreef Justin Pryzby:
> > On Sun, Dec 25, 2005 at 10:34:04PM +0100, Danai SAE-HAN (?$B4ZC#BQ) wrote:
> >> Op zon 25 dec 2005 17:30:07 +0100 schreef Justin Pryzby:
> >> > On Sat, Dec 24, 2005 at 12:14:06AM +0100, Danai SAE-HAN wrote:
> >> >> My questions:
> >> >> - What to do about the old changelogs if I want to use a single
> >> >> Debian source for all packages?
> >> > Are they all the same? You might just include them as
> >> > changelog.Debian-historical.
> >> No, they're not the same. hbf-cns40-[1-7], hbf-cns40-b5, hbf-jfs56
> >> and hbf-kanji48 each have their own changelog and Debian source
> >> package. hbf-cns40-1 to hbf-cns40-7, while each having their own
> >> Debian source package, have the same changelog.
> >> All changelogs contain only two or three items each.
> > You might also concatenate them all into ./debian/changelog.Debian...
> Ah yes, that was I was trying to say: with "changelog" I meant
> changelog.Debian. The upstream changelog is for each package the
> same, of course: only one entry. ;)
> I'll do just that: put the items of the three different
> changelog.Debian in a single item of hbf-fonts' changelog.debian.
> >> >> - Do I just put dummy entries in the changelog up to version 1.0.4?
> >> > Anything is probably better than dummy entries:)
> >> >> - Do I put the content of the old changelogs altogether in one
> >> >> changelog entry?
> >> > Why?
> >> As a filler... I could perhaps use the contents of the old changelogs
> >> in 1.0-1, 1.0-2 and 1.0-3?
> >> Because if I upload hbf-fonts-1.0-1, the already existing packages
> >> won't get updated because they are either 1.0-2, 1.0-3 or 1.0-3.1.
> > That has nothing to do with the changelogs, though.
> >> >> - What about the name of the Debian source packages ("hbf-cns40-1",
> >> >> "hbf-jfs56", etc. in comparison with the new source package
> >> >> "hbf-fonts")?
> >> > What about it?
> >> Won't it give any problems if my source package "hbf-fonts" provides
> >> "hbf-cns40-1" if there's already a Debian source package called
> >> "hbf-cns40-1"?
> > What do you mean "provides"? Do you mean, if the ./debian/control
> > file says "Provides:", or if the two packages include common files?
> > If they include common files, then you could either make the packages
> > "Conflict:", or make your package "Replaces:" the other one, or ...
> I meant the first option: to provide using a "provides:" line.
I guess it won't cause any problems; see Policy 7.4: "Virtual packages
> >> Should I put a Provdes:, Replaces: and Conflicts: field in
> >> debian/control?
> > If Anthony Fok is agreeable, then this might work. You should test
> > that the upgrade ("downgrade") happens as you indend.
> I'll do that.
Please let me know what you find.
> >> >> - Should I put the old packages on the "Replace:" line? Or even set
> >> >> "Conflicts: hbf-foo1 (<=1.0.3), hbf-foo2 (<=1.0.2), etc."?
> >> > Best to get in touch with Anthony Fok so you can coordinate it. If
> >> > you're going to do separate and pristine source packages, then why not
> >> > just use his?
> > There is also the concept of "disappear"ing a package, which might be
> > useful to you.
> That might even be more interesting!
But, only if you are going to be able to include each file that the
old packages include.