On Tue, 23 Dec 2008 11:28:55 +0100 Jacob Kanev <j_kanev@arcor.de> wrote: > Yes, I do. Originally I've written the software to use myself -- I have > a debian machine and want a clean system, so I create packages of my > software. Meanwhile other people use it, but distros other than Debian > or Ubuntu have never been an issue. Doesn't mean that it won't happen. Native packages are packages that can only work on Debian because of a reliance on the .deb format or Debian structures or Debian build helpers etc. 90% of free software should be non-native. The default is non-native - you need a *reason* to make it native - a reason that makes it impossible to use the package on anything except Debian. e.g. pilot-qof is my own and it is non-native, I create an upstream tarball and release it via SF. VCS includes the debian/ directory but the tarball does not. apt-cross is also my own but uses the apt perl bindings so really does not make any sense unless apt is at the core of the OS, so that is native. Also, seeing as this is written "to use myself", why put this into Debian anyway? Who wants yet more vanity packages in Debian? Not a good announcement that - the package scores -100 in my estimation right there. > Since I find it tedious to work > with multiple different directories (one for coding, one per version > for packaging), and do not know how to create and test non-debian > packages/installers, I never thought this relevant or even useful. It is relevant. It isn't one per version for packaging - if there is any chance that the package can work on other GNU/Linux platforms other than Debian and Ubuntu, you create one upstream tarball and leave it at that. There is no need for directories for each possible packaging permutation. If you want to create packaging files for Debian, fine, but don't go making RPM and Fink packaging layouts too - there's no way you can be as good as the relevant teams in all possible packaging formats. As for it being tedious - rubbish. If you can't be bothered to do simple things like that, don't bother packaging the code at all. Keep it to yourself and make everyone happy. > > Please fix it to be a non-native package and get back to us. > > If this is important, I will try. > Hopefully there is an easy way to do this, maybe even keeping one > directory and creating bash-installer, rpm, deb, ... from that one > single directory? No. Make an upstream release and tarball then create your debian/ directory separately (you can keep it in the same VCS but it must not be part of the released tarball). Don't try and make useless RPM's - just because it looks easy. It's only easy to make rubbish .rpm files, just as it is trivial to make rubbish .debs. People expect to only get a .tar.gz from upstream - .rpm or .deb files from upstream are nearly always complete trash. Unless upstream includes a mix of people including some Debian Developer(s) and some Fedora maintainers, there is zero chance of upstream creating useful .rpm *and* .deb files on their own. -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
Attachment:
pgpwB0eHaV1xB.pgp
Description: PGP signature