On 2012-04-06 12:07, Peter Samuelson wrote: | | [Jari Aalto] | > I'm planning to NMU with changes listed in previous mail's patch to help | > migrate away from deprecated dpatch. | | I don't understand the urgency to get away from dpatch | (http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=646420#17 - | I think Marga is right) but I suppose that's a question for | the lintian maintainers.
There is a reason for migrating away from dpatch. The original developer of dpatch abandoned the project. It was natural progression; not sensible to mantain parallel project to quilt(). The dpatch was orphaned very long time during 2009...20011 having no maintainer at all <http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=562697>. Margareta, that you quoted in URL above, probably hadn't been aware about the eroded state of dpatch when he commented the change; Lintian just made the state of affairs imminent. Dpatch is currently being oveseen only due to historical reasons and the current maintainer wishes packages to migrate away from it; hence the Lintian (E:) error for packages that are still using it. | In any case, migrating away from dpatch is one thing, migrating to | source format 3.0 and dh 9 is quite another. Please don't do the | latter with my packages. The format 3.0 is the reason for built-in patch management. Without it, the migration away from dpath is blocked. The reason for debhelper 9 is the current release goal (bug: important) that mandates to use hardened build flags. With debheper 9, these flags are very easy to enable. See <http://wiki.debian.org/ReleaseGoals/SecurityHardeningBuildFlags>. E.g. as for cplay being from 2005, xsok being from 2009, this would be a good time to update them. Likewise for apr and apr-util. Jari -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
