Hi, Glenn McGrath wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 08:01:46 +0200
> Matthias Urlichs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> many packages seem to contain .orig.tar.gz files which may or may not
>> be directly related to the files actually available from upstream.
>> That is unfortunate.
>
> How about changin
On Fri, Oct 24, 2003 at 01:21:16PM +1000, Glenn McGrath wrote:
> How about changing the tarball name if the source has been modified by
> debian.
>
> The name .orig.tar.gz does tend to indicate its the original source
> rather than the debian modified source.
>
> Perhaps tarballs that arent the o
On Fri, Oct 24, 2003 at 01:21:16PM +1000, Glenn McGrath wrote:
> Perhaps tarballs that arent the original source should remove the .orig
> and just use .tar.gz, or use some other extension such as
> debian.tar.gz
A simpler approach (and one I've used) is to generate a new "upstream"
version numbe
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 08:01:46 +0200
Matthias Urlichs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> many packages seem to contain .orig.tar.gz files which may or may not
> be directly related to the files actually available from upstream.
> That is unfortunate.
>
> I think that it would make sense to add a
Hi
I got the link on the discussion from DWN NN39 and becouse I had been affected
by the problem on the suject in the near past, I have some words to say as
end user of Debian system...
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 08:01:46AM +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > many packages seem to cont
Josip Rodin wrote:
> Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > >> Pristine sources are already a desired, but not required,
> > >> characteristic. There are enough brain dead upstream packaging
> > >> practices that we can not mandate pristine sources.
> >
> > > Dont go blaming "upstream" for debians problems, l
On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 04:01:26AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >> Pristine sources are already a desired, but not required,
> >> characteristic. There are enough brain dead upstream packaging
> >> practices that we can not mandate pristine sources.
>
> > Dont go blaming "upstream" for debians
Glenn McGrath dijo [Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 06:25:37PM +1000]:
> On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 02:01:25 -0500
> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Pristine sources are already a desired, but not required,
> > characteristic. There are enough brain dead upstream packaging
> > practices that
On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 08:01:46AM +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> Hi,
>
> many packages seem to contain .orig.tar.gz files which may or may not be
> directly related to the files actually available from upstream. That is
> unfortunate.
>
> I think that it would make sense to add a requirement
Hi, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 11:40:12 +0200, Matthias Urlichs
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> Uhh, if you can't create the identical file, how can you get
> one with the same md5sum? Have you cracked md5sum? What am I
> missing?
>
(A) run md5sum across all files in
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 11:40:12 +0200, Matthias Urlichs
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> While I admit that pristine sources are a good thing (which is why
>> not having pristine sources is deprecated); it is way premature to
>> suggest making that a policy requirement.
> Yo
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 11:16:49 +0200, Matthias Urlichs
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> This would be an undue burden on a number of packages.
> What's undue about inserting a "I created the .orig.tar.gz package
> by calling 'make clean_all_generated_files'." sentence in t
Matthias Urlichs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
>
> many packages seem to contain .orig.tar.gz files which may or may not be
> directly related to the files actually available from upstream. That is
> unfortunate.
>
> I think that it would make sense to add a requirement to Policy that
> the
Glenn McGrath, 2003-09-18 10:30:18 +0200 :
> On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 02:01:25 -0500
> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Pristine sources are already a desired, but not required,
>> characteristic. There are enough brain dead upstream packaging
>> practices that we can not mandate
Hi,
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> While I admit that pristine sources are a good thing (which is
> why not having pristine sources is deprecated); it is way premature
> to suggest making that a policy requirement.
You might have misunderstood me. I advocate requiring either
- package pristine upst
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 18:25:37 +1000, Glenn McGrath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 02:01:25 -0500
> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Pristine sources are already a desired, but not required,
>> characteristic. There are enough brain dead upstream packaging
>> practic
Hi,
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> This would be an undue burden on a number of packages.
What's undue about inserting a "I created the .orig.tar.gz package by calling
'make clean_all_generated_files'." sentence in the copyright / readme /
whatever file?
That's all I'd require. Anything else woul
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 02:01:25 -0500
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Pristine sources are already a desired, but not required,
> characteristic. There are enough brain dead upstream packaging
> practices that we can not mandate pristine sources.
Dont go blaming "upstream" for
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 08:01:46 +0200, Matthias Urlichs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Hi, many packages seem to contain .orig.tar.gz files which may or
> may not be directly related to the files actually available from
> upstream. That is unfortunate.
> I think that it would make sense to add a requi
Hi,
many packages seem to contain .orig.tar.gz files which may or may not be
directly related to the files actually available from upstream. That is
unfortunate.
I think that it would make sense to add a requirement to Policy that
the .orig.tar.gz file should be an unmodified copy from upstrea
20 matches
Mail list logo
