Le mardi 24 janvier 2006 à 16:51 +0530, priti Patil a écrit : > Hi Jérôme, > > Thanks for quick reply. Please, unless it is confidential, really personal, or wouldn't care to anybody else, try to answer to the mailing-list. Thanks
> On 1/24/06, Jérôme Warnier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Le mardi 24 janvier 2006 à 11:32 +0530, priti Patil a écrit : > > Hi list, > > > > How one should decide on what debian distribution (sid, > stable, > > unstable etc) should be used for building OpenOffice.org > source ? So > > that minimum or no issue should come across at all. > Official Debian packages are always meant to be built on > Unstable. > Later, they migrate to Testing, and once in a while, Testing > becomes > Stable. > > Yes, that's true. > > > There is an exception, though: security updates, which are > built to fix > a bug in Stable, but in the same time, they are meant to be as > close to > the original package as possible. > > Not clear. The security updates in Debian Stable are the original packages modified as few as possible to fix the issue. > Of course, you could consider that a package already in > Testing or > Stable is meant to be built on it (as it is there, there is > probably > great chances that it also builds). > > I've downloaded source code of OpenOffice.org 2.0 from it's downloads > area. What are you trying to achieve exactly? Do you want custom Debian packages or what? > And backports are (most of the time) special packages modified > from > Unstable only to build cleanly on Stable. They are not > official in any > way, though. > > Hmm...then what is the significance of such packages? To depend on as few packages not present in Stable as possible. > Hope it helped. > > Sorry to say, no. Hope we'll get somewhere soon, then. > > Priti > Priti.
