Juergen Menden wrote: > > On Wed, 26 Jun 1996, Dale Scheetz wrote: > > > > The Debian Source Format could be composed of: > > > > 1. A control file. This would most likely be a diff file sufficient to > > reconstruct the Debianized source tree from the original pristine source > > tree. > > 2. A tar.gz file containing the original pristine source tree. > > bingo. thats it. the only point is, that these files should > _not_ be included in a single source format!
Let me weigh in with another vote for keeping two files: the original sources (not necessarily in their original form), and the 'debianize' file. The 'debianize' file could be a patch file along with a list of files that need their permissions changed and what those permissions would be. The dpkg suite would contain a tool to extract the patches (maybe just a callable gunzip/tar), apply the patches (probably just call patch, right?), and then apply those permissions.If you let the user choose whether to do the steps all at once or individually, then the user could look at the patches before they we're applied, and then look at the permissions file before _they_ we're applied. The only trust required would be in dpkg, and if you don't trust dpkg, then you can't use Debian anyway, right? My opinion is that anybody who wants to look at source is probably sufficiently competent to figure out how to get two files instead of one. Ian, I realize I'm creating extra work for you....but I think that (original source + debianize) does make more sense than (debian source + undebianize). SteveG -- The Mole - I think, therefore I scream "Enough of this running shit." [Sean Connery on chase scenes, from THE UNTOUCHABLES]