Ximin Luo <infini...@gmx.com> writes: > I assumed that "extract to modified-build-ready" is the same as "extract > to build-ready". In other words, if you can "edit" then "produce a > modified package", then the you can also *not* perform the editing step > and just "produce an unchanged package". Likewise, if the former step is > impossible, the latter step is also impossible.
> In what circumstance is my deduction false? The part where you only went one direction with your deduction. :) It's true that a package ready to be modified is also ready to build. However, what doesn't apply is the inverse. It's *not* necessarily true that a package ready to build is the best state to be modified, and Policy does not require that a newly-unpacked source package be in the best state for subsequent modification (but does ask that the necessary steps be documented). > BTW, by "build-ready" I don't simply mean "`debian/rules build` > succeeds" - if the patches aren't applied, then the build succeeds only > by accident and not due to the intention of the maintainer. We do already require that dpkg-source -x followed by dpkg-buildpackage results in a binary package with all patches the maintainer intended to apply already applied. That's what the buildds do, so that's verified by the archive build process. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87bo28um85....@windlord.stanford.edu
