[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       debian-devel
Subject:    Re: Debian vs. Ubuntu source control file
From:       Raphael Hertzog <hertzog () debian ! org>
Date:       2010-01-05 12:56:52
Message-ID: 20100105125652.GB8716 () rivendell
[Download RAW message or body]

Hi,

On Tue, 05 Jan 2010, Xavier Roche wrote:
> This is the only reason why a patch is needed for all releases on
> ubuntu. The patch (<http://patches.ubuntu.com/h/httrack/>) is
> basically a one-liner in the control file (plus changelog and
> friends):
> 
> -Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}, webhttrack-common, iceape-browser |
> iceweasel | mozilla | firefox | mozilla-firefox | www-browser
> +Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}, webhttrack-common, iceape-browser |
> iceweasel | mozilla | firefox | abrowser | mozilla-firefox |
> www-browser
> 
> What do you, folks, think of this case ?

I would merge the change even if the package doesn't exist.

> (2) We may want to have a namespaced control fields, such as:

Please no. We have proper support for generating different dependencies
depending on the distribution, it's a combination of substvars and
dpkg-vendor.

On Tue, 05 Jan 2010, Daniel Leidert wrote:
> Maybe the source format v3 is the solution if we can mark changes as
> patch-in-debian and patch-in-ubuntu only?

You can have debian/patches/ubuntu.series and
debian/patches/debian.series in the same source package and the right one
is picked depending on /etc/dpkg/origin/default.

But patches are not allowed to modify the debian directory so that only
works for upstream changes.

Cheers,
-- 
Raphaël Hertzog


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]