On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 02:47:05PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Ok, then I must have misunderstood something. So it is clear then
> that Ubuntu does recompile every package.
To clarify explicitly:
- Ubuntu does not use any binary packages from Debian
- Most Ubuntu source packages are identical copies from Debian, while some are
modified for Ubuntu
- All Ubuntu binary packages are built for Ubuntu in Ubuntu chroots
> When you recompile packages, change their version number just as
> Debian does for binary-NMUs? That is, the first binary compile for
> an arch gets the same version number as the original source, but all
> future recompilations, which would include those done by Ubuntu or
> anyone else, should get a modified version number.
I believe there are still packages which break when bin-NMU'd (e.g.,
Depends: = ${Source-Version}), and there are parts of our infrastructure
which do not support them (Ubuntu doesn't do bin-NMUs). If it were
essential to version the packages differently, I would say that the source
package versions should be changed as well. Bin-NMUs are more trouble than
they are worth.
Why is it now important to you that the version numbers be changed, though?
This is only an issue when mixing packages between different derivatives,
which already breaks in other subtle ways, so I'm not very much inclined to
try to un-break it in this particular way, given that it's non-trivial.
> Will you establish an Ubuntu policy that all bugs found, whether
> patched or not, which might exist in the upstread Debian package,
> should always be reported to the BTS?
The "might" here is a problem. It is considered to be in poor taste to
report bugs to bugs.debian.org which have not been verified on Debian, and
attempting to confirm every bug is not feasible for us (we can't even come
close to confirming every bug on Ubuntu).
--
- mdz
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
