A Mennucc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [please, please repair your quoting mechanism. Done that for you in this mail].
> Henning Makholm wrote: > >> That is not a valid reason to pretend it is a native package. The >> correct thing to do is to create a new .orig.tar.gz with the offending >> files removed from it, but keep the rest of the .orig.tar.gz >> unchanged. Debian changes and package infrastructure should still go >> in a .diff.gz, and the package version should consist of an upstream >> version with a separate Debian revision. > > I object to this > > a file mplayer....orig.tar.gz is, as the name says, the original > distributed source No, it isn't there are lots of packages that have removed non-free files from their orig.tar.gz files that way. There might even be packages for which no upstream archive in tar.gz form exists. Please see http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=278524 and the discussions referenced therein. I wrote this bug report in order to enforce a policy that orig.tar.gz files *should* be pristine as possible. But the fact that this is necessary clearly shows that it is not a requirement. > distributing my modified tar.gz disguising it as the upstream original one > would be cause of confusion That's why you have to document this in debian/README.Debian or debian/README.Debian-source. But an orig.gar.gz file is just one technical part of a Debian source package, it doesn's say anything about pristine or repackaged. Regards, Frank -- Frank Küster Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich Debian Developer
