Re: Bits from the dpkg maintainer

2005-06-14 Thread Manoj Srivastava
On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 08:30:07 +0100, Scott James Remnant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > That's sadly totally untrue. Either you mean "use all the source in > the archive with the DPKG-DEV available in stable" -- or it was > utterly violated by all the packages in the sarge period that used > (e.g.)

Re: Bits from the dpkg maintainer

2005-06-14 Thread Anthony Towns
Scott James Remnant wrote: Yes, that's what we mean. The reason is that for various things (e.g., buildd, ftp-mastery, ...), we need to be able to manipulate source packages with the tools in stable. Note, I said "manipulate", not "build". Why can't you just install the unstable ones? For comp

Re: Bits from the dpkg maintainer

2005-06-14 Thread Pascal Hakim
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 11:50:43AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 10:39:30AM +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote: > > > Yes, that's what we mean. The reason is that for various things (e.g., > > > buildd, ftp-mastery, ...), we need to be able to manipulate source > > > package

Re: Bits from the dpkg maintainer

2005-06-14 Thread Scott James Remnant
On Tue, 2005-06-14 at 11:50 +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 10:39:30AM +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote: > > > Yes, that's what we mean. The reason is that for various things (e.g., > > > buildd, ftp-mastery, ...), we need to be able to manipulate source > > > packages with

Re: Bits from the dpkg maintainer

2005-06-14 Thread Wouter Verhelst
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 10:39:30AM +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote: > > Yes, that's what we mean. The reason is that for various things (e.g., > > buildd, ftp-mastery, ...), we need to be able to manipulate source > > packages with the tools in stable. Note, I said "manipulate", not > > "build". >

Re: Bits from the dpkg maintainer

2005-06-14 Thread Scott James Remnant
On Tue, 2005-06-14 at 11:20 +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 08:30:07AM +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote: > > > Historically we always wanted to be able to use all the source in the > > > archive with the tools available in stable. If that policy is still > > > true you wou

Re: Bits from the dpkg maintainer

2005-06-14 Thread Scott James Remnant
On Tue, 2005-06-14 at 09:18 +0100, Simon Huggins wrote: > On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 08:30:07AM +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote: > > It's no harder to backport dpkg-dev than it is debhelper; so I think > > it really just comes down to what formats the FTP masters (and dear > > katie) are prepared to

Re: Bits from the dpkg maintainer

2005-06-14 Thread Wouter Verhelst
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 08:30:07AM +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote: > > Historically we always wanted to be able to use all the source in the > > archive with the tools available in stable. If that policy is still > > true you would be able to use the new features by the time edge releases > > wi

Re: Bits from the dpkg maintainer

2005-06-14 Thread Simon Huggins
Hi Scott, On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 08:30:07AM +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote: > It's no harder to backport dpkg-dev than it is debhelper; so I think > it really just comes down to what formats the FTP masters (and dear > katie) are prepared to accept. Are you pushing for this or just seeing what

Re: Bits from the dpkg maintainer

2005-06-14 Thread Scott James Remnant
[I am not subscribed to debian-devel, please Cc: me if you feel your reply deserves my attention.] On Mon, 2005-06-13 at 10:10 +0200, Peter Palfrader wrote: > On Sun, 12 Jun 2005, Wesley J. Landaker wrote: > > > > The basics of the new format are: > > > * Multiple upstream tarballs are supp

Re: Bits from the dpkg maintainer

2005-06-13 Thread Andres Salomon
On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 21:05:56 +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote: [...] > > * The "Debian Diff" may be replaced by the "Debian Tar": > Instead of placing your changes and Debian directory as a patch against > the upstream tarball in a diff.gz, you may instead ship the Debian > d

Re: Bits from the dpkg maintainer

2005-06-13 Thread Lars Wirzenius
ma, 2005-06-13 kello 10:10 +0200, Peter Palfrader kirjoitti: > Historically we always wanted to be able to use all the source in the > archive with the tools available in stable. If that policy is still > true you would be able to use the new features by the time edge releases > with the new dpkg.

Re: Bits from the dpkg maintainer

2005-06-13 Thread Peter Palfrader
On Sun, 12 Jun 2005, Wesley J. Landaker wrote: > > The basics of the new format are: > > * Multiple upstream tarballs are supported: > > * The "Debian Diff" may be replaced by the "Debian Tar": > > * Bzip2 compression is supported as an alternative to gzip. > > As a practical matter,

Re: Bits from the dpkg maintainer

2005-06-12 Thread Wesley J. Landaker
On Sunday 12 June 2005 14:05, Scott James Remnant wrote: > The Wig & Pen ("Format: 2.0") source format is an evolutionary (rather > than revolutionary) change to the current source package format. > Brendan O'Dea's work on providing _unpack_ support has been integrated > into dpkg-source. Support