On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 9:56 PM, Niels Thykier <ni...@thykier.net> wrote: > Stefan Fritsch: >> Hi, >> >> [...] >> > > Hi, > > Thanks for improving dbgsym integration. :) > >> BTW, in some discussions some other questions were raised: >> >> - Is it really a good idea that foo-dbgsym depends on "foo (== >> foo-version)"? Wouldn't a Conflict or breaks on "foo (!= foo-version)" >> make more sense respective package? Consider that you want to analyze the >> core dump on a different system and foo may pull in quite a lot of >> dependencies, start servers, etc. >> > > could be debugging coredumps from multiple versions on the same > machine. As a debugger, you are basically interested in the > /usr/lib/debug files themselves and not the dbgsym.deb. > The .deb packages happen to be the only transport mechanism that > Debian provides, but we should consider that they limit people to > basically debugging on the same distribution as they are running (at > least if you want to dbg files for libc and other low level libraries). > > Anyway, The relation was added for two reasons: > > * It was a "requirement" imposed to me when I wrote it from several > others. I presume that it was historical to match that of -dbg > packages > > * To make dbgsym packages trivially policy compliant (without > duplicating the copyright file), I used usr/share/doc symlinks.
Do you link the doc dir or only the copyright file ? if it is a dir it will be a mess (see dpkg-maintscript-helper symlinktodir) BTW do we have created a depends ddeb-support (=version) ? If no do we have a plan of how to change format ? The = depends ease transition also. So I want to have the point of view of release team about this > >> - Is it allowed for packages that are not in the debug section to depend >> on packages in the debug section. [...] >> > > Not in Debian. The "main" component of the "debian" archive is > self-contained; the "debian-debug" archive is an add-on on top of this. > By introducing a dependency from "debian" to "debian-debug", you would > basically introduce a unsatisfiable dependency (for users, whom have not > opted in to the "debian-debug" archive). > > Largely, it is the technically similar to a package in main depending on > a package in non-free (except for the legal/ethical implications). > >> - Would an option to put all symbols from a source package into a single >> dbgsym package make sense? This would allow to get rid of all those dbgsym >> packages with only a single small file in them. >> > > Technically, it should rather trivial if we ignore some corner cases. > Notably, the dbgsym would no longer be (bit-for-bit) reproducible under > "noX" profiles (that exclude packages). > > We might also have to replace the usr/share/doc symlink in favour of a > real copyright file (or assume that dbgsym packages cannot contain > copyrightable information / is not subject to license terms or define > that they inherit their license information from $SOMEWHERE). > >> - Should we put the URL of the debug sym sources.list entry into the >> release file of the non-debug sym section? That way, apt could determine >> the location of the dbgsym packages by itself without having to edit >> sources.list. >> >> >> Cheers, >> Stefan >> > > I think that is an interesting idea and would go nicely hand in hand > with the request for other mirror metadata in #761348 (like what is the > base suite for "add-on suites" like experimental) > > Thanks, > ~Niels >