Hi, > Michael Tautschnig <mt@debian.org> writes: > > > At present, 213 packages fail to build using pbuilder, because they > > contain a debian/control file starting with comment lines, then a blank > > line, then the actual contents. This is caused by gnome-pkg-tools, as > > described in further detail in #684503. > > > At present, policy states (in 5.2) that blank lines separate paragraphs, > > comments are discarded, and that the *first* paragraph contains > > essential package information (Policy 5.2). > [...] (RFC 822...) > > I think there are two competing principles here: > > 1. It's always annoying to have to second-guess where comments are allowed > and where they aren't. I therefore like to err on the side of making > sure comments (and blank lines) are permitted anywhere that's sensible, > so that people don't have to memorize complex rules. That would argue > for allowing this format and fixing pbuilder. > > 2. debian/control is very widely parsed and used, and introducing new > syntax in it tends to break lots of things. Therefore, anything that > manipulates it should be maximally conservative. > > My opinion is that (1) is the right long-term direction, but (2) is a more > immediate concern, which would argue for changing gnome-pkg-tools to not > do this in the short run, but moving towards (1). > This is much in line with what Jonathan more or less concurrently said. I do like this proposal, even though we would be deviating from RFC 822 at this point (well, we do anyway already). The most important point for me would be to have this explicitly stated in policy, to make things unambiguous (and thus not having to debate interpretations). I will point the maintainers of both pbuilder and gnome-pkg-tools at this bug/thread and do hope they are fine with this proposal. Best, Michael
Attachment:
pgpzJLfuvUHzk.pgp
Description: PGP signature