Feedback on Ubuntu-specific debian/rules for building sysvinit
Olivier Gayot
olivier.gayot at canonical.com
Fri May 12 17:12:34 BST 2023
Hi Joost,
On 5/12/23 06:50, Joost van Baal-Ilić wrote:
> I do not oversee the complete picture here, but let me add this:
>
> "Bug #904302: any use of dpkg's vendor-specific patch series feature is a bug
> for packages in the Debian archive and such feature will be forbidden in the
> Debian archive after the release of Debian Buster."
>
> See https://bugs.debian.org/904302 ,
> https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/875zx0dei6.fsf@err.no .
>
> Some people felt very strongly that a build's result should be predictable, and
> should therefore be as independent as possible of the system the build is
> executed on. Doing hidden / tricky things makes software more non free. I
> believe that was the gist of the thinking there. Anyway, a valid argument in
> my opinion.
>
> Consequence here would be to keep all machinery on Ubuntu's side.
Thanks for pointing me to the relevant discussions. I think it's overall
a sound approach.
If you would like to drop the Ubuntu-specific code from debian/rules,
please go ahead and we will add back what's missing on Ubuntu's side.
In the near future, I plan to submit a set of changes that I think can
improve debian/rules in sysvinit. Hopefully, this should make it overall
better and should allow us on Ubuntu to minimize our delta.
Are pull-requests on salsa (against master) the preferred approach?
Thanks,
Olivier
More information about the Debian-init-diversity
mailing list