Bastian Blank <wa...@debian.org> writes: > On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 04:54:36PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: >> since a few weeks the Debian archive accepts source package using the new >> formats "3.0 (quilt)" and "3.0 (native)". > > I tried "3.0 (quilt)" with several packages today and none worked > properly, so several large packages will be stuck with "3.0 (native)". > > Bugs as of today. > * Packages with different patch systems like linux-2.6. In this case > dpkg-source ignores failures to register a patch and produces > sources without the changes. (#557618)
As discussed on IRC this is a matter of false advertising by the announcement and the wiki. Which also seems to be the main problem Rhonda has with the format. YOU CAN NOT MIX PATCH SYSTEMS. If the package uses a patch system, which might or might not be quilt, and you declare it 3.0 (quilt) format then dpkg also uses a patch system, which might or might not be quilt. You then pitch two patch systems against each other and most likely both will be using debian/patches/ with, unsurprisingly, catastrophic results. If you convert to 3.0 (quilt) then remove the patch system from debian/rules. In extrem cases, like linux-2.6, where that isn't possible you need to make sure it does not interfere with dpkg. The simplest way would be to not use debian/patches. Use debian/kernel-patches/ or something other. > * The "3.0 (quilt)" format is incompatible with "quilt" by using > different patch directories and features. (#557619) Quilt supports alternative patches directories and series files. It just isn't verry good at it as it requires QUILT_PATCHES / QUILT_SERIES to be set correctly every time you work on the source. The patch in #557623 makes quilt remember where it got its patches and series file from the first time you use it (e.g. when called from dpkg-source -x) so it just works out of the box after then. http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=557623 > * Fuzzy patches leads to silent ignore of the complete patchset. > (#557664) > * Different behaviour between quilt installed/not installed. > Several others against quilt themself are missing. > > The whole thing is super fragile. It is mostly impossible to use both > "3.0 (quilt)" and quilt themself because you use it to develop. Yes, a matter of false advertising. Use a different dir for the packages quilt use. >> The last step for us (dpkg >> maintainers) in this project is to change dpkg-source to use those new >> formats by default. > > I will propose a GR to stop you if you go on until it works properly. > And yes, this includes packages like linux-2.6, which have to use a more > sophisticated patch system than quilt. > > Or you start and propose a different format that can be mostly like 3.0 > (quilt) for the result (multiple tars) but without the implicit quilt > constraints. > >> However, before we do this we want to ensure that >> no packages (in sid) will be broken due to this switch and there are >> quite a few packages left to fix: > > You have to add the bugs above. > > Bastian It seems more and more people are against switching and really what is the point? Everyone who wants the new format is creating debian/source/format already. So all you do by switching the default is piss of those people that are against 3.0 (quilt) format and please no one. Further packages with patch systems need to be changed to work reliably with 3.0 (quilt) format, i.e. need to remove the patch system from debian/rules. Without adding debian/source/format at that time the packages then don't build as 1.0 format anymore so backporting breaks. Another large group of people and users pissed at you. MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
