Control: tag -1 + moreinfo On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 4:55 AM, Thomas Goirand <z...@debian.org> wrote: > You wrote: > > * Upstream is the same as Debian maintainer. > Therefore, build a native Debian package > > IMO, that's a very bad idea. this is a pain for downstream Debian > derivative who may want to add specific patches. With a native package, > it becomes less convenient to add distro-specific patches. Please don't > do this and re-upload a version of your package as non-native. > > Generally, native packages are very Debian specific, like for example > apt, dpkg, etc. Unless you develop this kind of tool, IMO, don't use a > native package. > > Thomas Goirand (zigo) > > P.S: Some other DD may have a different opinion, like for example I know > Joey Hess finds it ok and even wrote about it, but I believe a majority > of DD will agree with me.
+1 to what Thomas said above. Here's a very quick review of your packaging in https://github.com/aborrero/pkg-ethstatus (since I can't find an ethstatus package on mentors.d.n): - debian/ethstatus.substvars is automatically generated, and should be removed - even if you insist on a native package (please don't), you should still declare it in debian/source/format (which is currently non-existent) - latest standards version is 3.9.5 - please use a generic, non-Debian specific Makefile as upstream, and move the Debian-specific stuff (e.g. usage of dpkg-buildflags) into d/rules or elsewhere in your packaging Regards, Vincent -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
