What is the point of pre-compiling C code before packaging it into .debs? If you can answer that, apply that answer to Python code. Subverting the Debian package management system seems a bit odd for a Debian package to do, yet this is the impression I get from each Python package I install here. (Emacs packages tend toward the same stupidity, and this is why I try very hard to avoid installing python or emacs packages on most of the machines I administer.) Isn't the idea of precompiled binaries the reason for .deb packages in the first place? The compile-it-on-every-Debian-user's-box syndrome, rather than doing the work of compiling it just the once by a Debian developer (or buildd box) seems 180 degrees in opposition to the rationale for binary .deb packages. (Debian is no longer practical to use on a slow machine if a daily upgrade can take over 24 hours to run.) If I wanted to compile everything locally, I'd be running a *BSD or Slackware, right? Taking away the precompiled aspect of Debian is certainly not in keeping with point 4 of the Social Contract. dlocate /file/name/here doesn't work for files generated in a postinst, rather than included in the package itself. Nor does dpkg -S, nor do cruft and debsums. Again this seems to run contrary to point 4 of the Social Contract. It certainly would be in the Users' best interest to be able to detect tampering. Please give dpkg awareness of all files related to any given package. -- Please (OpenPGP) encrypt all mail whenever possible. Request the following Public Keys for Lazarus Long <lazarus@overdue.ddts.net> Type Bits/KeyID Fingerprint DSA KeyID: vvvv vvvv ElGamal: 2048g/CCB09D64 8270 4B79 CB1E 433B 6214 64EB 9D58 28A9 E8B1 27F4 (old 2001 keys) ElGamal: 2048g/215A8B4A F258 C2DD 7E9C DCEB E64F 82EC D4BB 3438 8B82 A392
Attachment:
pgpfvSBBu9oeS.pgp
Description: PGP signature