On Fri, 21 Apr 2017 15:50:23 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote: > On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 02:40:35PM +0100, Carnë Draug wrote: > > On 21 April 2017 at 00:02, gregor herrmann <gregoa@debian.org> wrote: > > > [...] > > > - Putting the last two issues together, I think that repackaging the > > > tarball in order to remove the 2 files would be the best solution; > > > if they're just gone we don't have to worry about merge issues with > > > the patch or about copyright/license issues with the files. > > > > > > [0] cf. https://pkg-perl.alioth.debian.org/howto/repacking.html > > > > The actual license for those files is in section 6 of the README file > > named 'libsvm·COPYRIGHT·AND·LICENCE'. Since lack of license is not an > > issue, should I still do the repackaging or should I use debian/rules > > to remove them? Oops, sorry for missing this. In that case, you could also add it to d/copyright as: Files: libsvm.* Copyright: 2000-2002, Chih-Chung Chang and Chih-Jen Lin License: BSD-3 Comment: The copyright/license information is taken from the top-level README file. License: BSD-3 … /* And remove the comment from the "Files: *" stanza. The new comment to help the ftp-masters find the data who might miss it as I did :) */ > I don't know about Perl team policy but I personally agree with Gregor > that removing those files is the most easy to understand way and I for > myself would prefer this solution. I don't think we have a strict policy for how to handle such cases, and all options have some pros and cons: - As mentioned, the remove-via-a-patch can be a bit fragile in the future. - Repackagaging (as +ds in this case) is quite clear but a bit heavy-handed. - Some package use debian/rules to move unwanted files back and forth before after build (deleting them is a bit messy when they are in git and cause warnings by dpkg-source, although this also works). Examples: the perl packages in [0] - What I'm wondering is if we need any special treatment at all; aren't the changes in remove-3rd-party-libsvm.patch (Makefile.PL SVM.xs bindings.h) enough to use the system lib? OTOH, it's safer if the bundled versions are not around ... I guess I'd go for the option of backupping+restoring the 2 files in debian/rules. But repackaging sounds ok to me as well. Cheers, gregor [0] https://codesearch.debian.net/search?q=mv.*\.save\s+path%3Adebian%2Frules -- .''`. https://info.comodo.priv.at/ - Debian Developer https://www.debian.org : :' : OpenPGP fingerprint D1E1 316E 93A7 60A8 104D 85FA BB3A 6801 8649 AA06 `. `' Member of VIBE!AT & SPI, fellow of the Free Software Foundation Europe `- NP: Led Zeppelin: Stairway to Heaven
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital Signature