The debian-private mailing list leak, part 1. Volunteers have complained about Blackmail. Lynchings. Character assassination. Defamation. Cyberbullying. Volunteers who gave many years of their lives are picked out at random for cruel social experiments. The former DPL's girlfriend Molly de Blanc is given volunteers to experiment on for her crazy talks. These volunteers never consented to be used like lab rats. We don't either. debian-private can no longer be a safe space for the cabal. Let these monsters have nowhere to hide. Volunteers are not disposable. We stand with the victims.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: New package naming etc...

> I have pine-3.94 just about ready to go (I am composing this in the new
> version) and thought that I should check some things first.
> As I understand it the new package naming convention is:
> 
> package-name_version-revision.architecture.deb
not quite, current convention is
package-name_version-revision_architecture.deb
> or is the revision field seperated from the version by an underscore?
No a hyphen
> Should we begin phasing in this naming convention now, or are we waiting
> for something else?
we are using it now
> Are there any other modifications that I need to consider for
> debian.rules? I have heard pieces/parts of several discussions.
I recommend in debian.rules (binary):
dpkg --build debian-tmp && dpkg-name -o -s .. debian-tmp.deb
Than you won't have to worry about the name of your binary.
Leaves us the naming of the other stuff: .tar.gz and .diff.gz.
Latest dchanges requires them to follow the underscores thing as well:
<package>_<version-revision>.tar.gz
<package>_<version-revision>.diff.gz
results in
<package>_<version-revision>.changes
 
> Which of the goals for 1.2 should we be considering implementing soonest?
good question, difficult to answer, IMHO changing debian.rules to get the
.tar.gz and .diff.gz files with underscores as well isn't very essential,
but others don't agree with me. It seems that most developers (I might 
be wrong, don't flame me on this) are in favor of underscores with all
binary, source, diff and changes. 

I suggest to not change the source and diff but concentrate on a way 
to reorganize the packaging so that only original sources are uploaded and
the special debian diffs and binaries for every debian revision:
This will give us:
mainstream source: package_version.tar.gz
debian diff 1: package_version-1.diff.gz
debian diff 2: package_version-2.diff.gz
debian diff 3: package_version-3.diff.gz
&c
debian binary 1: package_version-1_arch.deb
debian binary 2: package_version-2_arch.deb
debian binary 3: package_version-3_arch.deb
&c

This gives us a way to undo revision changes if they seem to break the
system. This approach doesn't require much diskspace. Putting all this
under revision control is better of course but this is a sort of manual
revision control system which is very easy to understand and to use
for this moment.

We have to think about a way to include other source for building
specific packages as well. How does redhat do this.


Erick