On Fri, 15 Jul 2011, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 10:53:03AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > b/ modify dpkg-source --before-build to keep a trace of the fact that > > it applied the patches (for example by creating > > .pc/dpkg-source-auto-applied) and in that case have dpkg-source > > --after-build unapply the patches so that we're back to a clean > > state after a succesful build. > > If the build fails, we'd keep the patches applied. > > That sounds perfectly reasonable to me.
FWIW, this is already implemented in git master. > > But it still happens that those patches are generated[1] when the maintainer > > did not expect any change at all. That's why we added the option > > --abort-on-upstream-changes for maintainers who never wants dpkg-source > > to auto-create a patch. > > For me, what's most annoying here is the use of the version number in the > patch name. This means, for instance, that if the clean target modifies the > contents (maybe by regenerating configure), each package version could > create a *new* patch for something that should definitely be represented as > part of a single patch. If the clean target does something like this, you obviously want to add the modified files to the ignore list with something like this in debian/source/options: extend-diff-ignore (^|/)configure$ The use of the version number was supposed to differentiate changes made in each upload for example by successive NMUers. Anyway, I have implemented my suggested change in a topic branch: git clone git://anonscm.debian.org/users/hertzog/dpkg.git -b pu/master http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=users/hertzog/dpkg.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/pu/master It now fails and suggests to call dpkg-source --record-changes to make the changes permanent. I would welcome some people trying it. Cf my message of yesterday to debian-dpkg: http://lists.debian.org/debian-dpkg/2011/07/msg00021.html > I'm inclined to think that --single-debian-patch is a more directly useful > default (possibly without --abort-on-upstream-changes). It doesn't give the > best results for patch naming and headers, but if the maintainer is actually > going to put in the effort to do all that, I would assume they can change > the default anyway. --single-debian-patch has a really specific purpose of someone wanting to always auto-generate the full patch because the changes are managed in a VCS and not in quilt. I don't agree that it should be the default. That said the naming of the automatic patch is less important if the default is to go through dpkg-source --record-changes since it requires the user to give a meaninful patch name. We could simplify everything and drop --single-debian-patch (just making it an alias for the new --auto-record-changes) by always using a non-versioned name. Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer Follow my Debian News ▶ http://RaphaelHertzog.com (English) ▶ http://RaphaelHertzog.fr (Français) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110716073739.gg13...@rivendell.home.ouaza.com
