On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 04:01:10PM +0000, mario.limoncie...@dell.com wrote: > I made some modifications and think I captured your suggestion here > https://github.com/fwupd/fwupd/commit/3508aecefdbd81924314834ac9e14bcd71aa253f > > Can you make sure that looks good now?
Unfortunately, no. Ansgar Burchardt kindly pointed out that Built-Using must refer to a source package, not a binary package. This was wrong in the previous iteration and I didn't spot it. Refer to the debian policy section 7.8. Now there are two other subtle things left. Previously, fwupd included the *.efi images. Now it recommends them. Is that enough or should that be a hard dependency to retain the old behaviour? I don't know. Does fwupd actually work without the *.efi binaries? I'm also wondering why the signing-template includes the SIGNARCH in the package name. This is not a regression, but it should follow the same reasoning as for why fwupd-unsigned doesn't have to include an architecture. Do note that the same binary package may be built from different source packages for different architectures as long as now two source packages build it for the same architecture. For instance libsystemd-dev used to be built from different source packages for linux-any and kfreebsd-any. Can we simplify that part as well? Helmut
