Re: dpkg source format 3 (quilt) packages, was: RFS: a52dec.git
Am 10.12.2009 16:02, schrieb Felipe Sateler: On Thu, 2009-12-10 at 09:38 +0100, Reinhard Tartler wrote: Rationale: switching to v3 at this point introduces even more inconsistency in our packaging and obviously our advocated tool 'git-buildpackage' doesn't cope with this new format properly yet. While I am not opposed at all to the new format, and besides, I'm really looking forward using it, I don't think that our team is ready for it yet. I agree. There is no hurry to move to 3.0, so we can wait for tools to adapt to it. Looks like this is finally happening now: http://honk.sigxcpu.org/con/Git_buildpackage_and_3_0_source_format.html -- Dipl.-Phys. Fabian Greffrath Ruhr-Universität Bochum Lehrstuhl für Energieanlagen und Energieprozesstechnik (LEAT) Universitätsstr. 150, IB 3/134 D-44780 Bochum Telefon: +49 (0)234 / 32-26334 Fax: +49 (0)234 / 32-14227 E-Mail: greffr...@leat.ruhr-uni-bochum.de ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: dpkg source format 3 (quilt) packages, was: RFS: a52dec.git
On Thu, 2009-12-10 at 07:37 +, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote: 2009/12/10 Reinhard Tartler siret...@tauware.de: Dmitrijs Ledkovs dmitrij.led...@gmail.com writes: Hello DD's Please sponsor new revision of a52dec. 1) Hopefully I generated changelog with git-dch correctly 2) There is warning from lintian about man pages. I cannot currently reproduce it outside chroot and still looking for ways to fix it. git clone git://git.debian.org/pkg-multimedia/a52dec.git First of all, thanks to you and Fabian work updating the package, espc. for experimenting with dpkg source Format 3 (quilt). While trying to build the source package, I noticed that when doing a `git-buildpackage -S`, the quilt patches will get applied during building the source package. However, they will not be unapplied during this process but remain as untracked changes in the branch. Is this really the intended way? TBH, I have doubts, and would find it more natural if the patches would be applied to the debian branch then, as it would retain the invariant that a git checkout produces a similar view of the source as a 'dpkg-source -x' on the produced source package. Yeap this is intended way. dpkg-source -x applies patches and leaves you with a patched tree. That's the mail reason for the new format. Unfortunately git-buildpackage has not yet been updated to handle this in a better way. Cause we still should have debain/patches/*.patch And I have no clue how to handle this =) I have been suggested to apply all patches on the git repo, but this would break the guidelines in the wiki. -- Saludos, Felipe Sateler signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: dpkg source format 3 (quilt) packages, was: RFS: a52dec.git
On Thu, 2009-12-10 at 09:38 +0100, Reinhard Tartler wrote: Felipe Sateler fsate...@gmail.com writes: Is this really the intended way? TBH, I have doubts, and would find it more natural if the patches would be applied to the debian branch then, as it would retain the invariant that a git checkout produces a similar view of the source as a 'dpkg-source -x' on the produced source package. Yeap this is intended way. dpkg-source -x applies patches and leaves you with a patched tree. That's the mail reason for the new format. Unfortunately git-buildpackage has not yet been updated to handle this in a better way. Cause we still should have debain/patches/*.patch And I have no clue how to handle this =) I have been suggested to apply all patches on the git repo, but this would break the guidelines in the wiki. When given these options: 1: switch back to source v1 2: apply patches inline to the debian branch (and amend the wiki) 3: leave the patches unapplied (current situation) I would (currently) vote 123 Rationale: switching to v3 at this point introduces even more inconsistency in our packaging and obviously our advocated tool 'git-buildpackage' doesn't cope with this new format properly yet. While I am not opposed at all to the new format, and besides, I'm really looking forward using it, I don't think that our team is ready for it yet. what do you think? I agree. There is no hurry to move to 3.0, so we can wait for tools to adapt to it. -- Saludos, Felipe Sateler signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
