Re: guile-oops

[Jeroen van Wolffelaar <jeroen@wolffelaar.nl>]

On Thu, Jun 24, 2004 at 11:42:10AM +0200, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 24, 2004 at 10:32:42AM +1000, Andrew Pollock wrote:
> > Egads!
> > 
> > So I go to try and prepare a QA upload of guile-oops to orphan it properly,
> > and it's currently a native package. I just converted visualos to a
> > non-native package, so I figure I'll have a go with guile-oops.
> > 
> > The bloody thing's got a tarball inside its source tarball. What should I do
> > in this case? Leave it as a native package? Run away?
> 
> You have to restart debian version by -1. 

Why? I really don't see why this should be necessary.

I checked out the package, and it actually has a tarball inside with the
contents of the 1.0 version of that very debian package...

Since newest upstream is 1.0.2, simply start with that upstream
.orig.tar.gz, and apply any patches you can discover in the package
(though due to the very weird layout of the package, that might be
hard).

Note that upstream includes a 'debian' directory: the upstream author
apparantly did develpment in Debian sid, since the sid version has
changes to the upstream changelog (additions), and already bumps the
reported version number as 1.0.3 (!), but hasn't yet been released on
GNU's website.

Since there was no upstream release since March 2001, maybe this package
should be removed from the archive altogether.

--Jeroen

-- 
Jeroen van Wolffelaar
Jeroen@wolffelaar.nl (also for Jabber & MSN; ICQ: 33944357)
http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl