That is a related but separate problem. I actually reported that in 2011, and it was fixed for Wheezy: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=636148 (smarty3 Debian maintainer CC'ed)
But it seems to have been reverted sometime since, and in Jessie the Debian smarty3 package no longer includes the source code. Regards, Thue 2014-10-17 21:57 GMT+02:00 Steve Langasek <vor...@debian.org>: > On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 12:43:29PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > > Thue Janus Kristensen <thu...@gmail.com> writes: > > > > Now in the context of the smarty3 Debian source package, I would like > to > > > know where in the policy manual it says that the debian/rules build > > > target should actually compile from source in favor of shipping > > > precompiled object code. However, the Debian policy manual doesn't > > > actually seem to say that > > > anywhere. https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-source.html > would > > > seem like the obvious place to say so. > > > > Am I blind, or is it perfectly OK for a Debian source package to ship > and > > > install object code, even when the source is available? > > > This is something for which we don't have something explicit in Policy, > > but we do have rules in Debian. Unfortunately, not everything that you > > have to do to have a valid Debian package is described in Policy. > > > In this case, the rule as it's actually enforced is not completely clear > > (at least to me), but roughly, it should be *possible* to rebuild the > > package from its original source, but it's not required to do this on > > every binary package build. However, a lot of folks in Debian feel like > > we should be moving towards doing this with every binary build, so I > would > > expect increasing resistence against not doing so. > > > But there are many packages in Debian right now that use the results of > > bison or flex instead of running bison or flex during the build, and this > > has traditionally been accepted. Your PHP example seems to be > equivalent, > > so I would expect it to be accepted as well, albeit with some resistence > > as mentioned above, provided that generating the PHP code from the > > original source is still *possible*. > > > In contrast, using binary *.o files instead of running the compiler has > > *not* been accepted. I think this has more to do with practical issues > > around the likelihood of creating bugs than any specific principle of > > philosophical consistency. > > In the specific case of smarty, the software appears to be under the LGPL. > So it's a violation of the license for Debian to redistribute this without > the complete source. > > -- > Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS > Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. > Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ > slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org >
