Subject: Re: Is there any opposition to a debian/ top-level subdir?
From: Paul Rohr (paul@abisource.com)
Date: Mon Feb 12 2001 - 17:44:05 CST
At 02:17 PM 2/12/01 -0800, Aaron Lehmann wrote:
>On Mon, Feb 12, 2001 at 10:17:37AM -0800, Paul Rohr wrote:
>> 2. Add a Debian-specific "make distribution" target which runs a script
to
>> do all the necessary rearranging to create a single massive source tarball
>> which meets all their constraints (top-level Debian directory, packages in
>> the same tarball, etc.) Sounds like a very easy script to write, no?
>>
>> The remaining administrative burden to type "make distribution" before
>> uploading sounds pretty reasonable.
>
>Unfortunately it isn't. Debian packages are often built by machines,
>which is one of the reasons that the debian/ top-level subdir is
>required by debian policy.
>
>For example, when the Alpha autobuilder tried to compile something
>non-standard like this, the results wouldn't be pretty.
OK, now I'm really confused.
I thought the whole point was to produce a Debian-format package --
basically a tarball with a specific format, no? -- that could be uploaded to
wherever official Debian things live. (Just because our stuff lives in CVS
in a slightly different format shouldn't matter.) This activity would
happen whenever the Debian maintainer wanted a release blessed with the
magic Debian holy water.
To do so, he or she (or their automated cron job equivalent) would follow a
process roughly as follows:
1. Pick a CVS tag and check out a clean copy of all our trees.
2. Type "make distribution", and make sure it worked.
3. Upload the results to Debian land.
Even if you totally reorganized our trees, all that would do is omit
portions of step #2.
What am I missing?
Paul,
confused
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Mon Feb 12 2001 - 17:57:18 CST