On Sat, 2008-07-05 at 12:21 -0400, Jay Berkenbilt wrote: > So, is using tarball in tarball considered "bad" these days?
I see no reason to consider this "bad". > Is it > viewed as an approach that once had its time but is now discouraged, > or I don't use it, but don't let that discourage you. :) > is it just a matter of personal preference Yes I think that it's a matter of personal preference / packaging style. > and creating a > README.source that tells the user what to do file makes it all okay? It is a good idea to document tricky things in such a README file. > > I want my packages to be in the best possible shape, so I'm trying to > decide whether I should go to the trouble of changing my personal > packaging habits to work around the two issues above. Trying something new is sometimes fun. :) > Some of these > will be easier to handle after we can switch to 3.0 (quilt), but as > far as I know, there is no way to replace your .orig.tar.gz without > changing the package version, and I don't want to introduce epochs for > this. No need to introduce epochs. You can update package foo-1.2.3-4 to foo-1.2.3+debian-1 or something similar. > > Advice welcome. My advice is that you use the packaging style conforming to debian-policy that you feel most comfortable with. Regards, Bart Martens -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
