Alec Leamas writes:
> Hi,
>
> On 28/11/2024 09:01, Simon Josefsson wrote:
>> The checksums will be different when Debian
>> re-pack upstream's source tarball, but there is still value in recording
>> the upstream tarball used as a basis for creating the Debian source
>> tarball
>
> Personally, th
Hi,
Le 2024-11-28 11:28, Alec Leamas a écrit :
Personally, the few packages I maintain are mostly repacked. Isn't
there also value in storing the hash of the repacked tarball, the thing
actually used?
Not much value, as both the hash and the data would be stored at the
same place (git repo
Quoting Alec Leamas (2024-11-28 11:28:02)
> Hi,
>
> On 28/11/2024 09:01, Simon Josefsson wrote:
> > The checksums will be different when Debian
> > re-pack upstream's source tarball, but there is still value in recording
> > the upstream tarball used as a basis for creating the Debian source
> > t
Hi,
On 28/11/2024 09:01, Simon Josefsson wrote:
The checksums will be different when Debian
re-pack upstream's source tarball, but there is still value in recording
the upstream tarball used as a basis for creating the Debian source
tarball
Personally, the few packages I maintain are mostly re
Hi,
On 28/11/2024 09:01, Simon Josefsson wrote:
The checksums will be different when Debian
re-pack upstream's source tarball, but there is still value in recording
the upstream tarball used as a basis for creating the Debian source
tarball
Personally, the few packages I maintain are mostly re
All,
There is discussion in the 'Simpler git workflow for packaging with
upstreamless repositories' thread about the merrits of pristine-tar.
One important value people appear to see is to be able to assert that
orig.tar.gz's integrity can be chained back into some data in the git
repository.
I
6 matches
Mail list logo
