Am Sonntag, den 12.02.2006, 20:01 +0100 schrieb Marc Haber: > The eximdoc4 source package is built from two upstream tarballs, one > with the texinfo docs and one with the html docs. To massage this into > Debian source package format, the two upstream .tar.bz2 tarballs are > tar.gz'ed together to form eximdoc4_foo.tar.gz. > > It has now shown to be necessary to apply patches to the upstream > docs. I would like to use dpatch for that.
Could you also write a bug-report for dpatch? This is a feature I also miss and I would of course support such a request. > Which approach is the most promising and least ugly? > > (1) > Have a 01_unpack.dpatch file which doesn't patch, but unpack the > upstream tarballs? IMO a possible workaround. > (2) > Transform the "Debian upstream tarball" (which is locally built anyway > to include the two upstream tarballs in unpacked form? The tar.gz will > be much bigger then since bz2 compression is rather effective on the > text docs. That's of course a solution that works with dpatch. > (3) > Modify debian/rules to first unpack, second patch, third build? Does work in the real build process, but not for dpatch-edit-patch,w hich does not work like this. It only makes a copy of the working directory, then runs the clean target in this copy and then makes again a copy, which is your new work-directory. You would have to add an unpack target to the clean target, which is probably not a good idea. > Is there a package which does this and can be taken as a template? patch. Then you can move it to dpatch format. The only problem is, that you cannot create patches with dpatch-edit-patch. Regards, Daniel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
