[Pkg-mono-devel] Tangerine: why repackaged? (or: why +dfsg?)
d.paleino at gmail.com
Sat Sep 20 17:12:01 UTC 2008
(tangerine maintainers CCed)
I was doing some "maintainance work" (I'm part of Pkg-Cli-Apps team) on
tangerine, and I just noticed it has a "+dfsg" in the version number. Frankly,
I can't understand why: I downloaded the original tarball from upstream's
website, and the only difference is:
$ diff -urN tangerine-0.3.0/ tangerine-0.3.0+dfsg/
Files tangerine-0.3.0/deps/log4net.dll and tangerine-0.3.0+dfsg/deps/log4net.dll differ
Files tangerine-0.3.0/deps/Nini.dll and tangerine-0.3.0+dfsg/deps/Nini.dll differ
Files tangerine-0.3.0/plugins/file/db4o.dll andtangerine-0.3.0+dfsg/plugins/file/db4o.dll differ
$ cd tangerine-0.3.0+dfsg/
$ find . -name "*.dll"
AFAICT, you just deleted those three precompiled .dll's. So, why the "+dfsg"
suffix? A "+debian", or "+ds"  would've been better IMHO.
Also, the repackaging wasn't really necessary. You just could've passed those
files to dh_clean in the clean target of debian/rules: they wouldn't have been
considered for the .diff.gz.
Anyhow, it's also good practice to provide a get-orig-source target in
debian/rules, to be able to recreate the repackaged tarball, without using
apt-get source (like I had to :( ).
The final question is: do you believe we can remove that +dfsg suffix, just
removing those files with dh_clean, making everyone happier? :)
. ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino
: :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/
`. `'` GPG: 1392B174 ----|---- http://snipr.com/qa_page
`- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-mono-devel/attachments/20080920/3b53c487/attachment.pgp
More information about the Pkg-mono-devel