Re: RFC: Addition of "Builder: " field to non-maintainer compiled binaries
On Mon, Mar 30, 1998 at 10:43:37PM +0100, James Troup wrote:
>
> I think the Right solution would be to alter dpkg-buildpackage to have
> it include this information in the deb and .changes file, and to use
> the value of this new field to sign the .changes file with. This
> would leave the Maintainer: field intact in the .changes file
> (non-i386 builders wouldn't need to use -m"foo" anymore), and provide
> the info required without the kludgey hack I'm about to suggest.
Nice idea. I've patched dpkg-buildpackage, dpkg-gencontrol
and dpkg-genchanges to use the environment variable "DPKGBUILDER" if
it's set, and generate the appropiate "Builder:" field, but it doesn't
work with fakeroot because fakeroot doesn't preserve the enviroment.
I think it's a bug in fakeroot.
> Any objections? Any suggestions for a field name other than
> "Builder"? "Compiler"? "Arch-Compiler"? "Uploader"?
I would choose "Builder" of "Uploader".
--
Juan Cespedes
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: