Bug#991533: Bug#992136: Don't require Standards-Version field when only udebs Standards-Version for udeb packages

[Sean Whitton]

Hello,

On Mon 19 Sep 2022 at 09:29PM -07, Russ Allbery wrote:

> So, in addition to saying that Standards-Version is generally not used for
> udebs or for source packages that only build udebs (I would use wording
> like that rather than "required" since Policy puts no requirements on
> udebs at all), maybe we should add to this paragraph in 1.1 (Scopes):
>
> udebs (stripped-down binary packages used by the Debian Installer) do
> not comply with all of the requirements discussed here. See the Debian
> Installer internals manual for more information about them.
>
> That could be as simple as saying "udebs (...) and source packages that
> produce only udebs do not comply"

Sounds good to me.

-- 
Sean Whitton


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Bug#991533: Bug#992136: Don't require Standards-Version field when only udebs Standards-Version for udeb packages

[Cyril Brulebois]

Russ Allbery  (2022-09-19):
> I'm fine with this change, but as Sam points out, the deeper point here is
> that Policy doesn't apply to udebs.  This is the whole point of udebs.
> 
> I didn't go back and read the history of this bug

Neither did I (I think I was asking for something quite easy and simple,
to make our lives easier, but it kind of blew up and I stepped backward).

> but I suspect that, to the extent that this is a Policy issue, the problem
> was that a source package is not itself a udeb and therefore it wasn't clear
> whether Policy applies to source packages that only produce udebs.  My gut
> feeling is that it should not: the whole point of udebs is that they get to
> break the rules.
> 
> So, in addition to saying that Standards-Version is generally not used for
> udebs or for source packages that only build udebs (I would use wording
> like that rather than "required" since Policy puts no requirements on
> udebs at all), maybe we should add to this paragraph in 1.1 (Scopes):
> 
> udebs (stripped-down binary packages used by the Debian Installer) do
> not comply with all of the requirements discussed here. See the Debian
> Installer internals manual for more information about them.
> 
> That could be as simple as saying "udebs (...) and source packages that
> produce only udebs do not comply"

Looks good to me, thanks!


Cheers,
-- 
Cyril Brulebois (k...@debian.org)
D-I release manager -- Release team member -- Freelance Consultant


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Bug#991533: Bug#992136: Don't require Standards-Version field when only udebs Standards-Version for udeb packages

[Russ Allbery]

Sean Whitton  writes:
> On Thu 12 Aug 2021 at 11:47PM +02, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
>> Sean Whitton  (2021-08-12):
>>> On Tue 27 Jul 2021 at 08:41AM -06, Sam Hartman wrote:

 So, it seems fairly obvious to me that Standards-Version is important
 for packages that produce both debs and udebs.
 I'm assuming the focus of our discussion then is on source packages that
 only produce udebs.
 Have I got that right?

 By definition, most of the policy that affects binary packages does
 not inherently apply to udebs.  As I understand it, that's kind of
 the point of udebs.

>>> Would you agree with this?  You're only asking to stop seeing warnings
>>> about S-V for source packages which produce only udebs?

>> Yes, that looks good to me: source packages (also) producing debs would
>> deserve a rightful nag.

> I believe that we failed to consider udebs when we made the change which
> made S-V mandatory.  I propose we remove the requirement for S-V in
> udebs and source packages producing only udebs, until and unless someone
> provides a positive argument why S-V ought to be mandatory in these
> cases too.

I'm fine with this change, but as Sam points out, the deeper point here is
that Policy doesn't apply to udebs.  This is the whole point of udebs.

I didn't go back and read the history of this bug, but I suspect that, to
the extent that this is a Policy issue, the problem was that a source
package is not itself a udeb and therefore it wasn't clear whether Policy
applies to source packages that only produce udebs.  My gut feeling is
that it should not: the whole point of udebs is that they get to break the
rules.

So, in addition to saying that Standards-Version is generally not used for
udebs or for source packages that only build udebs (I would use wording
like that rather than "required" since Policy puts no requirements on
udebs at all), maybe we should add to this paragraph in 1.1 (Scopes):

udebs (stripped-down binary packages used by the Debian Installer) do
not comply with all of the requirements discussed here. See the Debian
Installer internals manual for more information about them.

That could be as simple as saying "udebs (...) and source packages that
produce only udebs do not comply"

-- 
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org)