Le 01/08/2012 18:48, Bart Martens a écrit : > On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 11:24:20AM +0200, Tomasz Buchert wrote: >> Hello mentors, >> I am working on one bug of mine >> (http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=664457) and I've >> noticed that, technically, my new package will have no upstream. > > When I read bug 664457 then this package would have an upstream. What exactly > do you mean by "my new package will have no upstream" ? > > Regards, > > Bart Martens Hi Bart, my idea to resolve the bug above is to create binary packages that will download the star packs from sf.net during installation. I won't have any upstream source for this: the source package will be its own upstream. The package is super simple: basically one python script that generates files in debian/ directory for all star catalogues. My current workflow is that I have a script that packs the whole directory (without debian/ and .git/ dirs) and creates *.orig.tar.gz in the parent directory so that 'debuild' does not complain. What I'm doing right now is basically "faking" upstream. I just find it counterintuitive and wonder if there is a better way. This is a general question: if I have a package that is supposed to be only installed on debian/ubuntu (whatever the reason might be), what workflow do I follow while packaging/upgrading?
I hope it helps. Tomasz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/50196bd1.7020...@inria.fr
