On Wed, Jul 28, 2004 at 09:30:14PM +1000, Nathan Scott wrote: > On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 04:56:26PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: > > xfsprogs is packaged with a debian component (always -1) in its version > > number. If it's a native package, then this component will never be > > used, and should be removed. > > I disagree, as it is useful - I have used this once for a > security problem we had in xfsdump a few years back.
This doesn't fit your statement that there are _never_ any patches. Your packaging of xfstools as a native package with a debian version in the version number is quite unique and is prone to break local build schemes. I have, however, not found any part of policy you are violating. Please consider either changing to a really native package (without debian-version in the version number) or to a non-native package with an optionally empty Debian patch. The only change to do this is building with the release tar in Debian name format in the parent dir. > For > that case the package version had moved on from the stable > series version, and we wanted a -2 with just the security > fix - it worked well in that situation. In that situation, the only way to find out which patch you applied is to download both the upstream tar (which might not be available any more due to ongoing development) and the Debian tar and to diff both. This is a bad thing. Greetings Marc, even packaging his own software as non-native package because having a .diff.gz is _very_ convenient. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
