Re: Debian vs. Ubuntu source control file

2010-01-06 Thread Lucas Nussbaum
On 07/01/10 at 03:08 +0100, Frans Pop wrote: > Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > > Anyway, to avoid modifying debian/control directly, it's easy to add an > > additional substvar (ubuntu:Browser?): > > debian/control: > > Depends: [...], iceweasel | ${ubuntu:Browser} > > Doesn't that leave a dangling "|" if

Re: Debian vs. Ubuntu source control file

2010-01-06 Thread Frans Pop
Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > Anyway, to avoid modifying debian/control directly, it's easy to add an > additional substvar (ubuntu:Browser?): > debian/control: > Depends: [...], iceweasel | ${ubuntu:Browser} Doesn't that leave a dangling "|" if you're building for Debian? I'd suggest in debian/control

Re: Debian vs. Ubuntu source control file

2010-01-06 Thread Reinhard Tartler
On Mi, Jan 06, 2010 at 08:32:45 (CET), Russ Allbery wrote: > I am personally not horribly fond of a package building differently on > Debian or Ubuntu via only this mechanism, though. I think it violates a > very important invariant: the same package with the same version number > will have the

Re: Debian vs. Ubuntu source control file

2010-01-05 Thread Russ Allbery
Lucas Nussbaum writes: > Modifying the source stanza is debian/control is clearly a bad idea. But > for binary stanzas, debian/control is only a template from which > DEBIAN/control is generated. If tools get information about binary > packages using debian/control, then it's probably a bug (lint

Re: Debian vs. Ubuntu source control file

2010-01-05 Thread Lucas Nussbaum
On 05/01/10 at 16:31 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Tue, Jan 05, 2010 at 03:52:46PM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote: > > On Tue, 05 Jan 2010, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > > > On 05/01/10 at 21:39 +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote: > > > > > > > > > That's only true with the v3 format. If you stick with v1, you

Re: Debian vs. Ubuntu source control file

2010-01-05 Thread Steve Langasek
On Tue, Jan 05, 2010 at 12:39:40PM +0100, David Paleino wrote: > I remember, some time ago, there has been some discussion about treating > ubuntu as a "pseudo-arch", so that we could do something like: > Depends: foo | bar [ubuntu] > I also remember this proposal was rejected, or hostaged to sa

Re: Debian vs. Ubuntu source control file

2010-01-05 Thread Steve Langasek
On Tue, Jan 05, 2010 at 03:52:46PM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote: > On Tue, 05 Jan 2010, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > > On 05/01/10 at 21:39 +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote: > > > > > > > That's only true with the v3 format. If you stick with v1, you can > > > > patch debian/control at unpack time. > > > > >

Re: Debian vs. Ubuntu source control file

2010-01-05 Thread Don Armstrong
On Tue, 05 Jan 2010, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > On 05/01/10 at 21:39 +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote: > > > > > That's only true with the v3 format. If you stick with v1, you can > > > patch debian/control at unpack time. > > > > > And in both cases, you are free to modify it manually during the build. >

Re: Debian vs. Ubuntu source control file

2010-01-05 Thread Russ Allbery
Xavier Roche writes: > Russ Allbery wrote : >> I'm pretty sure Lintian doesn't care. > Yep, but not debcheck (as Paul Wise corrected), which would produce > another warning Yeah, but debcheck produces warnings about lots of things that aren't really problems, just things it doesn't understand.

Re: Debian vs. Ubuntu source control file

2010-01-05 Thread Lucas Nussbaum
On 05/01/10 at 21:39 +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote: > > > That's only true with the v3 format. If you stick with v1, you can > > patch debian/control at unpack time. > > > And in both cases, you are free to modify it manually during the build. > > Err, what? debian/control modified during build? Su

Re: Debian vs. Ubuntu source control file

2010-01-05 Thread Joerg Jaspert
> That's only true with the v3 format. If you stick with v1, you can > patch debian/control at unpack time. > And in both cases, you are free to modify it manually during the build. Err, what? debian/control modified during build? Sure not. -- bye, Joerg anyone from the MIA team around? tbm?

Re: Debian vs. Ubuntu source control file

2010-01-05 Thread Joerg Jaspert
>>> What do you, folks, think of this case ? >> I would merge the change even if the package doesn't exist. > What about lintian crying in the rain ? More seriously, can we assume > that we'll never have package name collisions (ie. "foo", if exist on > two distributions, are guaranteed to be the

Re: Debian vs. Ubuntu source control file

2010-01-05 Thread Xavier Roche
Russ Allbery wrote : I'm pretty sure Lintian doesn't care. Yep, but not debcheck (as Paul Wise corrected), which would produce another warning -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: Debian vs. Ubuntu source control file

2010-01-05 Thread Russ Allbery
Raphael Hertzog writes: > On Tue, 05 Jan 2010, Xavier Roche wrote: >> What about lintian crying in the rain ? > What tag does it generate? > AFAIK lintian has no knowledge of what package exist or not. And even if > it does, you can override the tag justifying that it exists in ubuntu. > It wou

Re: Debian vs. Ubuntu source control file

2010-01-05 Thread Raphael Hertzog
On Tue, 05 Jan 2010, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > On 05/01/10 at 13:56 +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > But patches are not allowed to modify the debian directory so that only > > works for upstream changes. > > That's only true with the v3 format. If you stick with v1, you can > patch debian/control

Re: Debian vs. Ubuntu source control file

2010-01-05 Thread Lucas Nussbaum
On 05/01/10 at 13:56 +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > But patches are not allowed to modify the debian directory so that only > works for upstream changes. That's only true with the v3 format. If you stick with v1, you can patch debian/control at unpack time. And in both cases, you are free to mod

Re: Debian vs. Ubuntu source control file

2010-01-05 Thread Paul Wise
On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 9:12 PM, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Tue, 05 Jan 2010, Xavier Roche wrote: >> Raphael Hertzog a écrit : >> >>What do you, folks, think of this case ? >> >I would merge the change even if the package doesn't exist. >> >> What about lintian crying in the rain ? > > What tag do

Re: Debian vs. Ubuntu source control file

2010-01-05 Thread Raphael Hertzog
On Tue, 05 Jan 2010, Xavier Roche wrote: > Raphael Hertzog a écrit : > >>What do you, folks, think of this case ? > >I would merge the change even if the package doesn't exist. > > What about lintian crying in the rain ? What tag does it generate? AFAIK lintian has no knowledge of what package e

Re: Debian vs. Ubuntu source control file

2010-01-05 Thread Mike Hommey
On Tue, Jan 05, 2010 at 02:00:46PM +0100, Xavier Roche wrote: > Raphael Hertzog a écrit : > >>What do you, folks, think of this case ? > >I would merge the change even if the package doesn't exist. > > What about lintian crying in the rain ? More seriously, can we > assume that we'll never have pa

Re: Debian vs. Ubuntu source control file

2010-01-05 Thread Xavier Roche
Raphael Hertzog a écrit : What do you, folks, think of this case ? I would merge the change even if the package doesn't exist. What about lintian crying in the rain ? More seriously, can we assume that we'll never have package name collisions (ie. "foo", if exist on two distributions, are gu

Re: Debian vs. Ubuntu source control file

2010-01-05 Thread Raphael Hertzog
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 () is > basically a one-liner in the control file (plus changelog and > friends): > > -Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}, webhttrack-

Re: Debian vs. Ubuntu source control file

2010-01-05 Thread Fabian Greffrath
AFAIUI this is the reason why virtual packages have been introduced. You cannot - and definitely should not - alternatively depend on each and every webbrowser in Debian (or ubuntu), but every webbrowser should do "Provides: x-www-browser". So all you have to do is depend on the default webbrow

Re: Debian vs. Ubuntu source control file

2010-01-05 Thread Daniel Leidert
Am Dienstag, den 05.01.2010, 10:36 +0100 schrieb Xavier Roche: > [ Don't hesitate to redirect me to an already discussed > solution/thread/FAQ/anything if necessary, but I didn't find anything > related in recent (months) debian-devel. ] > > Hi folks (and happy new year to all DD), > > A minor

Re: Debian vs. Ubuntu source control file

2010-01-05 Thread Roger Leigh
On Tue, Jan 05, 2010 at 10:36:33AM +0100, Xavier Roche wrote: > This is the only reason why a patch is needed for all releases on > ubuntu. The patch () is basically > a one-liner in the control file (plus changelog and friends): > > -Depends: ${shlibs:Depe

Re: Debian vs. Ubuntu source control file

2010-01-05 Thread David Paleino
Xavier Roche wrote: > [..] > > (1) Not a very common case, which can be left as is (ie. patch all > further control files) > > (2) We may want to have a namespaced control fields, such as: > > (3) Namespace specific packages ? > > (4) Ubuntu-specific optional control file ? > > (5) Something

Debian vs. Ubuntu source control file

2010-01-05 Thread Xavier Roche
[ Don't hesitate to redirect me to an already discussed solution/thread/FAQ/anything if necessary, but I didn't find anything related in recent (months) debian-devel. ] Hi folks (and happy new year to all DD), A minor issue (reported by Nick Ellery) with debian vs. ubuntu package is that the