Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

James Westby wrote: [...] > > I was just wondering if you had considered what a solution might look > like. It seems like adding a new watch file format that has multiple > lines would work quite nicely for uscan. > That's already possible, the problem is that it doesn't consider multiple source

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

martin f krafft writes: > also sprach Goswin von Brederlow [2009.03.09.1443 +0100]: > > From a usability point of view I find it unusable. With so many > > branches you always forget to merge one or don't commit to the > > right one. > > Uh, this is in response to TopGit, which addresses precis

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

also sprach Stefano Zacchiroli [2009.03.09.2210 +0100]: > It is more expressive, and can give more easily access to > individual patches (e.g. for pushing them upstream) when they get > entangled with others. I'm using it because I'm convinced that it > implements the right® packaging work-flow,

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 03:10:22PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote: > > That said, TopGit will not lose track, and if you employ a smart > > branch-naming-scheme, neither will you. > The point is: is it simpler to use than quilt push/pop/edit or not? No. It is more expressive, and can give more easily

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

On Mon, 2009-03-09 at 12:30 +0100, Jan Hauke Rahm wrote: > Imagine an orig tarball with a config directory and an orig part-tarball > named orig-config.tar.whatever. The second tarball would overwrite > what's in the config dir of the first one when executing dpkg-source -x. > If you just store tha

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

On Mon, 2009-03-09 at 09:24 +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > If bzr-builddeb wants to provide the tarballs, they must have been > injected at some point (otherwise you won't provide pristine tarballs) > and you could record the additional information at that point. That is almost true, except for

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

also sprach Marco d'Itri [2009.03.09.1510 +0100]: > > That said, TopGit will not lose track, and if you employ a smart > > branch-naming-scheme, neither will you. > The point is: is it simpler to use than quilt push/pop/edit or not? I don't know quilt merging capabilities or the conflict resoluti

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 02:47:28PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > Raphael Hertzog writes: > > > On Mon, 09 Mar 2009, James Westby wrote: > >> On Sun, 2009-03-08 at 17:11 +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > >> > There's nothing to specify here, dpkg-source uses all additional tarballs > >> > tha

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

On Mar 09, martin f krafft wrote: > That said, TopGit will not lose track, and if you employ a smart > branch-naming-scheme, neither will you. The point is: is it simpler to use than quilt push/pop/edit or not? If the only benefit I get is being able to automatically publish my patches then it's

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

also sprach Goswin von Brederlow [2009.03.09.1443 +0100]: > From a usability point of view I find it unusable. With so many > branches you always forget to merge one or don't commit to the > right one. Uh, this is in response to TopGit, which addresses precisely this problem: keeping track of the

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

Jan Hauke Rahm writes: > On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 01:09:34AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: >> If you're trying to recreate the tarball from a set of files, this doesn't >> work as well, but that also has other problems (it doesn't give you a >> reproducible tarball). I suspect that if you're storing

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

Raphael Hertzog writes: > On Mon, 09 Mar 2009, James Westby wrote: >> On Sun, 2009-03-08 at 17:11 +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: >> > There's nothing to specify here, dpkg-source uses all additional tarballs >> > that match the regexp (exactly like it identifies the .orig tarball >> > currently).

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri) writes: > On Mar 09, Russ Allbery wrote: > >> I think TopGit is the right solution to this. > Is it plausible to use a branch-per-patch solution for packages > containing 30-60 patches? > > -- > ciao, > Marco >From the space and git point of view that is completly d

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

Jan Hauke Rahm writes: > On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 05:52:16PM +1000, James Westby wrote: >> On Sun, 2009-03-08 at 16:07 +0100, Jan Hauke Rahm wrote: >> > And how do you store that in a VCS if a second tarball includes files >> > that actually overwrite files of the main orig tarball. At build time

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 01:36:53PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Mon, 09 Mar 2009, Jan Hauke Rahm wrote: > > I might be wrong here but recreating an orig tarball from the data in a > > VCS can always lead to a different tarball than the actually original > > tarball when you unpacked (and comm

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

On Mon, 09 Mar 2009, Jan Hauke Rahm wrote: > On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 01:09:34AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > > If you're trying to recreate the tarball from a set of files, this doesn't > > work as well, but that also has other problems (it doesn't give you a > > reproducible tarball). I suspect t

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

also sprach Marco d'Itri [2009.03.09.1250 +0100]: > > I think TopGit is the right solution to this. > Is it plausible to use a branch-per-patch solution for packages > containing 30-60 patches? TopGit can certainly handle it, but it'll make a royal merging mess of your history. The idea of TopGit

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

On Mar 09, Russ Allbery wrote: > I think TopGit is the right solution to this. Is it plausible to use a branch-per-patch solution for packages containing 30-60 patches? -- ciao, Marco signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 01:09:34AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > If you're trying to recreate the tarball from a set of files, this doesn't > work as well, but that also has other problems (it doesn't give you a > reproducible tarball). I suspect that if you're storing enough additional > metadata

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 05:52:16PM +1000, James Westby wrote: > On Sun, 2009-03-08 at 16:07 +0100, Jan Hauke Rahm wrote: > > And how do you store that in a VCS if a second tarball includes files > > that actually overwrite files of the main orig tarball. At build time > > directories in the main or

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

On Mon, 09 Mar 2009, James Westby wrote: > On Sun, 2009-03-08 at 17:11 +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > There's nothing to specify here, dpkg-source uses all additional tarballs > > that match the regexp (exactly like it identifies the .orig tarball > > currently). > > bzr-builddeb will endeavour

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

Mikhail Gusarov writes: > gear rules are richer, allowing also to generate patches with git-diff > (think of upstream branch and topic-foo branch). I think TopGit is the right solution to this. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE,

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

Twas brillig at 01:09:34 09.03.2009 UTC-07 when r...@debian.org did gyre and gimble: RA> debian/source/tarballs file that lists the names of all of the RA> upstream tarballs. Just as the reference: similar approach for src.rpm: http://docs.altlinux.org/manpages/gear-rules.5.html (see the 'di

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

James Westby writes: > bzr-builddeb will endeavour to provide the ".orig.tar.gz" for a format 1 > package, so that you can construct a source package from a bzr branch. > > This will be essentially impossible for 3.0 (quilt) packages that use > multiple tarballs, as there is no information in the

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

On Sun, 2009-03-08 at 16:07 +0100, Jan Hauke Rahm wrote: > And how do you store that in a VCS if a second tarball includes files > that actually overwrite files of the main orig tarball. At build time > directories in the main orig tarball are supposed to be overwritten by > the part tarball but if

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

On Sun, 2009-03-08 at 17:11 +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > There's nothing to specify here, dpkg-source uses all additional tarballs > that match the regexp (exactly like it identifies the .orig tarball > currently). bzr-builddeb will endeavour to provide the ".orig.tar.gz" for a format 1 package

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

On Sun, 08 Mar 2009, Russ Allbery wrote: > Raphael Hertzog writes: > > > In practice, there's one exception, the debian tarball can contain > > binary files that are installed outside of the debian dir. Those are > > necessary listed in debian/source/include_binaries. > > According to the dpkg-s

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

Jan Hauke Rahm dijo [Fri, Mar 06, 2009 at 12:15:21AM +0100]: > > All in all, things are in a rather good shape but I still need some help. > > While I tested extensively the dpkg-source side, we still need to ensure > > that all our additional tools cope well with the new source package > > format

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

Raphael Hertzog writes: > In practice, there's one exception, the debian tarball can contain > binary files that are installed outside of the debian dir. Those are > necessary listed in debian/source/include_binaries. According to the dpkg-source man page, you mean include-binaries. Is there a

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

On Sun, Mar 08, 2009 at 05:11:59PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > In theory you can use "dpkg-source --skip-patches -x" and import > everything except the debian dir. Those are the upstream sources, I'm not > sure it's interesting to handle each upstream tarball separately. In fact, > doing so cou

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

On Sun, 08 Mar 2009, James Westby wrote: > * Building a 3.0 (native) package worked fine. > * Building a 3.0 (quilt) package worked ok. There are two things that > will need work here though: > - If there are more tarballs required than .orig.tar.gz and > .debian.tar.gz then it w

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

Hi, since I'm working on svn-buildpackage which aims at a similar target I'm open for suggestions, so I pick some of your ideas up... On Sun, Mar 08, 2009 at 11:55:11AM +1000, James Westby wrote: [bzr-builddeb] > * Building a 3.0 (quilt) package worked ok. There are two things > that > wi

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

On Thu, 2009-03-05 at 22:19 +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > All in all, things are in a rather good shape but I still need some help. > While I tested extensively the dpkg-source side, we still need to ensure > that all our additional tools cope well with the new source package > format (*-buildpac

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

As requested I created a wiki page to track this project: http://wiki.debian.org/Projects/DebSrc3.0 In the section "Validation of all tools with new source formats" there's a list of apps to test with new source formats. Feel free to complete the list with more apps to test and feel free to do the

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

Goswin von Brederlow writes: > Michael Biebl writes: >> Ah, ok. I was looking at the referenced bug reports and there you >> suggested to use the debian/control field (sed -i -e '/^Source:/ >> aFormat: 3.0 (quilt)' .../debian/control) >> >> I think the wiki page you mentioned with up-to-date inf

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

Michael Biebl writes: > Raphael Hertzog wrote: >> On Fri, 06 Mar 2009, Michael Biebl wrote: >>> dpkg-gencontrol: warning: unknown information field 'Format' in input data >>> in >>> general section of control info file >>> >>> Should I file a bug against dpkg-dev for that? >>> >>> And another mi

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

On Fri, 06 Mar 2009, Michael Biebl wrote: > I think the wiki page you mentioned with up-to-date information regarding this > topic would really be a good idea. Yeah, I've noted that and will set it up. > >> Build-Depends, it would imho be useful if lintian issued a warning, that > >> this > >>

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Fri, 06 Mar 2009, Michael Biebl wrote: >> dpkg-gencontrol: warning: unknown information field 'Format' in input data in >> general section of control info file >> >> Should I file a bug against dpkg-dev for that? >> >> And another minor issue: vim doesn't know about the

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

On Fri, 06 Mar 2009, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > > Did you also test if they produce the same content? > > Many packages don't produce the same content after each build, because > of timestamps written in some files, for example. I could easily check > that they provide the same binary packages accord

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

On Thu, 05 Mar 2009, Luk Claes wrote: > > as announced earlier during the lenny dev cycle, I would like to switch to > > the new source package formats ("3.0 (quilt)" and "3.0 (native)") during > > the squeeze cycle so that we can benefit from the numerous improvements. > > For this kind of importa

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

On 05/03/09 at 22:35 +0100, Luk Claes wrote: > > My goal is not only to accept them on ftp-master but also to update > > dpkg-source to build new source package automatically. That's why I > > rebuilt the archives to see what packages would not build with the > > new format (without fixes). The fai

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

On Fri, 06 Mar 2009, Michael Biebl wrote: > Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > > > I will do (thanks to Lucas Nussbaum) another archive rebuild in the > > upcoming weeks to see if we have new failures. Hopefully the release team > > can grant the status of release goal to this project so that we can more

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

On Fri, 06 Mar 2009, Michael Biebl wrote: > dpkg-gencontrol: warning: unknown information field 'Format' in input data in > general section of control info file > > Should I file a bug against dpkg-dev for that? > > And another minor issue: vim doesn't know about the new Format field in > debian/

Re: Prefix level in Quilt patches (was: Support of new source packages in squeeze)

On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 10:12 AM, Ben Finney wrote: > How can I reliably inform the Debian packaging tools that my quilt > patches are in ‘patch -p0’ format? You don't want to use -p0 otherwise you'll get bugs from buxy about not supporting dpkg source package v3. I'm using this to generate my pa

Prefix level in Quilt patches (was: Support of new source packages in squeeze)

Michael Biebl writes: > Or how will you rebuild packages with 3.0 (quilt) that already use > dpatch or cdbs with simple-patchsys? (the latter would at least > require to normalize all patches to -p1, […]). The ‘quilt(1)’ manpage documents a ‘-p’ option: -p n Create a -p n style patc

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > I will do (thanks to Lucas Nussbaum) another archive rebuild in the > upcoming weeks to see if we have new failures. Hopefully the release team > can grant the status of release goal to this project so that we can more > easily NMU the remaining packages. > Will you do

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > All in all, things are in a rather good shape but I still need some help. > While I tested extensively the dpkg-source side, we still need to ensure > that all our additional tools cope well with the new source package > format (*-buildpackage, apt-get source, lintian,

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

On Thu, Mar 05, 2009 at 10:19:15PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > as announced earlier during the lenny dev cycle, I would like to switch to > the new source package formats ("3.0 (quilt)" and "3.0 (native)") during > the squeeze cycle so that we can benefit from the numerous improvements. > For t

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 2:49 PM, Всеволод Величко wrote: > Hello. > > On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 12:19 AM, Raphael Hertzog wrote: >> as announced earlier during the lenny dev cycle, I would like to switch to >> the new source package formats ("3.0 (quilt)" and "3.0 (native)") during >> the squeeze cyc

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

Hello. On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 12:19 AM, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > as announced earlier during the lenny dev cycle, I would like to switch to > the new source package formats ("3.0 (quilt)" and "3.0 (native)") during > the squeeze cycle so that we can benefit from the numerous improvements. Excuse

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

Raphael Hertzog writes: > All in all, things are in a rather good shape but I still need some > help. While I tested extensively the dpkg-source side, we still need to > ensure that all our additional tools cope well with the new source > package format (*-buildpackage, apt-get source, lintian,

Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze

Raphael Hertzog wrote: > Hello, Hi > as announced earlier during the lenny dev cycle, I would like to switch to > the new source package formats ("3.0 (quilt)" and "3.0 (native)") during > the squeeze cycle so that we can benefit from the numerous improvements. > For this kind of important change

Support of new source packages in squeeze

Hello, as announced earlier during the lenny dev cycle, I would like to switch to the new source package formats ("3.0 (quilt)" and "3.0 (native)") during the squeeze cycle so that we can benefit from the numerous improvements. For this kind of important change, it's best to start early in the rel