[Privoxy-devel] Privoxy packaging for Debian

[Fabian Keil]

Roland Rosenfeld <roland at spinnaker.de> wrote on 2021-01-17:

> On Fr, 18 Dez 2020, Fabian Keil wrote:
> 
> > could you please briefly describe how you currently create
> > the Debian packages?
> 
> Okay, let's think about what I really do.  This may be really Debian
> specific for me, as I build packages that I upload to Debian
> (source-only since Debian autobuilds all packages from source
> nowadays) as well as packages, that I upload to SourceForge/Privoxy
> containing binaries for i386 and amd64 based on the current Debian
> stable version.  So here we go (I'll try to use <programlisting> tags,
> but avoid <para> to keep this readable here):

Thanks a lot for the detailed description.
I've added some tags and committed it.

> > I would like to update the developer-manual which seems to
> > be incomplete at the moment.
> > 
> > Could you also please commit the changes to the ./debian
> > files you made for the 3.0.29 packages?
> 
> Did so earlier this day.

Thanks.

> > Would it be possible for future releases to commit the
> > changes to the ./debian files before the tree is tagged?
> 
> That's not that trivial since my current workflow requires that a
> upstream tarball is already existing.  Maybe I could try to keep the
> debian tree of snapshot more up to date in the future.

I'd appreciate it.
 
> > To make GPL compliance more convenient I think it would
> > be great if the Debian packages could be easily (re)created
> > from a Git checkout which currently doesn't seem to be the case.
> 
> I thought about this in the last hours and just wrote about it in the
> above "documentation" and just pushed a change to the repository which
> makes the current git buildable this way.

Great.

> > Somewhat related, it's not clear to me why we currently
> > don't ship the ./debian files as part of the source tarball.
> 
> Since Debian adds the debian dir itself, it usually created some
> chaos, if upstream also ships a debian directory, which than has to be
> overwritten by Debian and may conflict.  But this seems to be a
> historic problem when Debian used old source format (1.0), where the
> debian directory was created as a patch, while current 3.0 format
> ships debian directory as a tar file and as far as I can see,
> dpkg-source -x just deletes debian dir from upstream source on
> unpacking and creates a new debian dir from *.debian.tar.xz shipped as
> part of the Debian source package.
> So it shouldn't be a problem to ship debian dir in upstream privoxy
> source tarball nowadays.

Okay.

On the other hand if the debian files will not match the
Privoxy version advertised in the dist tarball name they
may cause confusion.

Something to think about some more ...

> PS: Would it be possible to rename slackware/rc.privoxy.orig to
>     slackware/rc.privoxy?  The Debian cleanup mechanisms always delete
>     or complain about the file, since .orig is usually some artefact
>     of patching...

Would renaming it to slackware/rc.privoxy.original be sufficient
to silence the complaints?

The GNUMakefile currently filters the file using slackware/rc.privoxy
as destination file name so renaming the source file to the same name
would probably result in an empty file.

Fabian
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.privoxy.org/pipermail/privoxy-devel/attachments/20210118/06f0818c/attachment.bin>