Russ Allbery wrote: > Kevin B McCarty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> The convention is documented as a "should" in Developers' Reference 6.7.8. > > To the contrary, devref 6.7.8 makes it clear that one should NOT do this. > You should use the virgin upstream source tarball, with whatever directory > name they ship with. dpkg copes, and you should not repackage upstream > just to change the directory name. > > *If* the source is repackaged, *then* you should use the .orig convention, > but lintian has no way of knowing whether the source is repackaged or not.
Hmm, OK, maybe lintian could make this check only if the package's version number includes ".dfsg" or ".ds" or the diff.gz includes debian/README.Debian-source ? Those seem to me to be sufficient (though not necessary) conditions to determine that the source was repackaged. (Unless upstream for some reason used .dfsg or .ds in their own versioning scheme.) I guess this could be a bit complicated, though, so feel free to tag this bug wontfix or close it. >> This check would have saved me from #416008 ;-) > > That's not really a bug. That's not a supported way of unpacking a Debian > package. Debian packages should be unpacked with dpkg-source or with a > program that performs the same operations. Since you're repackaging the > upstream source anyway, you can certainly fix it if you so choose, but > there's no need to do so. OK, thank you for the clarification. I've been redoing the orig.tar.gz files for the affected packages even if it isn't a real bug, just to make things "cleaner". best regards, -- Kevin B. McCarty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Physics Department WWW: http://www.princeton.edu/~kmccarty/ Princeton University GPG: public key ID 4F83C751 Princeton, NJ 08544 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
