Hi,
On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 02:42:59PM +0100, José Luis Tallón wrote:
> > But, I think you got it slightly wrong with the format 3.0 (quilt)
> > stuff. I for myself never touched this yet, but from reading, 3.0
> > (quilt) should work as follows:
> > - you DON'T have to build-depend on quilt
> > - you DON'T have to include /usr/share/quilt/quilt.make
> > - it JUST works (tm) :)
> >
> ... unless you are backporting to lenny, where dpkg-source is not that
> advanced.
> In fact, since recent dpkg-source interact so cleanly with quilt, the
> calls to quilt in debian/rules should effectively become no-ops.
>
> That is: it is in fact NOT needed to add quilt-related calls to files in
> the 3.0 format ...
> ... UNLESS you want to be kind to porters.
Mh, I thought Lenny's dpkg does support format 3.0 (quilt)?
Do you have any documentation where it's said different?
> > On the other hand, I see two patches in your debian/patches, which were
> > never applied and are not now either... It seems to be patched in your
> > orig.tar.gz already.
> >
> The problem being that upstream author, Marco D'Itri, does not agree
> with bindgraph being packaged for Debian.
> Some time ago, I had to repackage bindgraph source (that's where the 'a'
> suffix comes from) to include the changes with respect to the original
> ---which is unmodified since AFAIK ---
> The patches are there to document the deviations from "pure upstream".
>
> ... which might mean a need for a README.Source, I agree
>
> Only options are, hence:
> - leave them as documentation of deviations from upstream ("less bad")
> - revert to upstream source 0.2 + patches ---> absurdly big debdiff
> for a trivial change, plus versioning paradox
> - publish a new "completely unofficial" 0.3 version, including all
> changes and/or upstream + patches applied at build-time
>
> but I might be missing some other option. Any suggestions are welcome,
> of course
Well, I think option 2 isn't that bad when using format 3.0 ;)
But on the other hand, you have it working like this now, and one should
never change a running system.
Thats also why I don't understand why you convert to 3.0 now, you don't
have any patches to apply besides debian/, and here you do not gain
anything over the old version. Thus I'd stay with 1.0, fix the stuff you
want to fix, and upload that one then. But it's your package, so you are
free to decide to go to 3.0.
> If you sponsored couriergraph too, I'd be more than glad, too ;)
Not today, and most probably not tomorrow, but I can have a look on that
if you don't find anyone in the meantime ;)
--
Bruce Schneier can read and understand Perl programs.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
