X-Git-Url: http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/ucgi/~ianmdlvl/git?a=blobdiff_plain;f=pkgs.dbk;h=38ab0ddcec69e4384935073ed72c6f229bdb947c;hb=d83ad0ef98fc97553ef37b7a9e1fe63f7d16096f;hp=68e24f1f96ca6d41ebfecf30d7915214faac8ae9;hpb=8a77d09ebb4f5b985db6da174892a3a66d5aa272;p=developers-reference.git diff --git a/pkgs.dbk b/pkgs.dbk index 68e24f1..38ab0dd 100644 --- a/pkgs.dbk +++ b/pkgs.dbk @@ -1,6 +1,8 @@ + "http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/xml/4.4/docbookx.dtd" [ + %commondata; +]> Managing Packages @@ -11,10 +13,10 @@ and porting packages. New packages If you want to create a new package for the Debian distribution, you should -first check the Work-Needing and +first check the Work-Needing and Prospective Packages (WNPP) list. Checking the WNPP list ensures that no one is already working on packaging that software, and that effort is not -duplicated. Read the WNPP web +duplicated. Read the WNPP web pages for more information. @@ -29,9 +31,9 @@ current URL where it can be downloaded from. You should set the subject of the bug to ``ITP: foo -- short description'', substituting the name of the new package for foo. The severity of the bug report -must be set to wishlist. If you feel it's necessary, send -a copy to debian-devel@lists.debian.org by putting the address -in the X-Debbugs-CC: header of the message (no, don't use +must be set to wishlist. If you feel it's necessary, send +a copy to &email-debian-devel; by putting the address in the +X-Debbugs-CC: header of the message (no, don't use CC:, because that way the message's subject won't indicate the bug number). @@ -75,8 +77,8 @@ posted to debian-devel-changes. -It is helpful to the people who live off unstable (and form our first line of -testers). We should encourage these people. +It is helpful to the people who live off unstable (and form +our first line of testers). We should encourage these people. @@ -87,7 +89,7 @@ of what is going on, and what is new, in the project. -Please see +Please see for common rejection reasons for a new package. @@ -108,7 +110,7 @@ for native packages. The debian/changelog file conforms to a certain structure, with a number of different fields. One field of note, the -distribution, is described in distribution, is described in . More information about the structure of this file can be found in the Debian Policy section titled debian/changelog. @@ -204,7 +206,7 @@ There are two types of Debian source packages: -the so-called native packages, where there is no +the so-called native packages, where there is no distinction between the original sources and the patches applied for Debian @@ -267,33 +269,34 @@ The package build process extracts this information from the first line of the Distribution field of the .changes file. -There are several possible values for this field: `stable', `unstable', -`testing-proposed-updates' and `experimental'. Normally, packages are uploaded -into unstable. +There are several possible values for this field: stable, +unstable, testing-proposed-updates and +experimental. Normally, packages are uploaded into +unstable. -Actually, there are two other possible distributions: `stable-security' and -`testing-security', but read for more -information on those. +Actually, there are two other possible distributions: stable-security + and testing-security, but read + for more information on those. It is not possible to upload a package into several distributions at the same time.
-Special case: uploads to the <emphasis>stable</emphasis> distribution +Special case: uploads to the <literal>stable</literal> distribution -Uploading to stable means that the package will transfered -to the p-u-new-queue for review by the stable release -managers, and if approved will be installed in +Uploading to stable means that the package will transfered +to the proposed-updates-new-queue for review by the stable +release managers, and if approved will be installed in stable-proposed-updates directory of the Debian archive. -From there, it will be included in stable with the next +From there, it will be included in stable with the next point release. -Extra care should be taken when uploading to stable. -Basically, a package should only be uploaded to stable if one of the following -happens: +Extra care should be taken when uploading to stable. +Basically, a package should only be uploaded to stable if +one of the following happens: @@ -313,7 +316,7 @@ a released architecture lacks the package -In the past, uploads to stable were used to address +In the past, uploads to stable were used to address security problems as well. However, this practice is deprecated, as uploads used for Debian security advisories are automatically copied to the appropriate proposed-updates archive when the advisory is released. @@ -325,34 +328,34 @@ Changing anything else in the package that isn't important is discouraged, because even trivial fixes can cause bugs later on. -Packages uploaded to stable need to be compiled on systems -running stable, so that their dependencies are limited to -the libraries (and other packages) available in stable; -for example, a package uploaded to stable that depends on -a library package that only exists in unstable will be rejected. Making -changes to dependencies of other packages (by messing with -Provides or shlibs files), possibly making those other -packages uninstallable, is strongly discouraged. +Packages uploaded to stable need to be compiled on systems +running stable, so that their dependencies are limited to +the libraries (and other packages) available in stable; +for example, a package uploaded to stable that depends on +a library package that only exists in unstable will be +rejected. Making changes to dependencies of other packages (by messing with +Provides or shlibs files), possibly +making those other packages uninstallable, is strongly discouraged. The Release Team (which can be reached at -debian-release@lists.debian.org) will regularly evaluate the -uploads To stable-proposed-updates and decide if your -package can be included in stable. Please be clear (and -verbose, if necessary) in your changelog entries for uploads to -stable, because otherwise the package won't be considered +&email-debian-release;) will regularly evaluate the uploads to +stable-proposed-updates and decide if your package can be +included in stable. Please be clear (and verbose, if +necessary) in your changelog entries for uploads to +stable, because otherwise the package won't be considered for inclusion. It's best practice to speak with the stable release manager before uploading to -stable/stable-proposed-updates, so +stable/stable-proposed-updates, so that the uploaded package fits the needs of the next point release.
-Special case: uploads to <emphasis>testing/testing-proposed-updates</emphasis> +Special case: uploads to <literal>testing/testing-proposed-updates</literal> Please see the information in the testing section for details. @@ -367,11 +370,12 @@ section for details. Uploading to <literal>ftp-master</literal> To upload a package, you should upload the files (including the signed changes -and dsc-file) with anonymous ftp to ftp-master.debian.org in +and dsc-file) with anonymous ftp to &ftp-master-host; in the directory /pub/UploadQueue/. +url="ftp://&ftp-master-host;&upload-queue;">&upload-queue;. To get the files processed there, they need to be signed with a key in the -debian keyring. +Debian Developers keyring or the Debian Maintainers keyring +(see ). Please note that you should transfer the changes file last. Otherwise, your @@ -389,19 +393,13 @@ the Debian package .
-
-Uploading to <literal>non-US</literal> - -Note: non-us was discontinued with the release of sarge. - -
-
Delayed uploads -Delayed uploads are done for the moment via the delayed queue at gluck. The -upload-directory is gluck:~tfheen/DELAYED/[012345678]-day. -0-day is uploaded multiple times per day to ftp-master. +Delayed uploads are done for the moment via the delayed queue at gluck +. The upload-directory is +gluck:~tfheen/DELAYED/[012345678]-day. 0-day is uploaded +multiple times per day to &ftp-master-host;. With a fairly recent dput, this section @@ -413,11 +411,12 @@ fqdn = gluck.debian.org incoming = ~tfheen -in ~/.dput.cf should work fine for uploading to the DELAYED queue. +in ~/.dput.cf should work fine for uploading to the +DELAYED queue. Note: Since this upload queue goes to -ftp-master, the prescription found in &ftp-master-host;, the prescription found in applies here as well.
@@ -426,19 +425,19 @@ linkend="upload-ftp-master"/> applies here as well. Security uploads Do NOT upload a package to the security -upload queue (oldstable-security, stable-security, etc.) without prior -authorization from the security team. If the package does not exactly meet the -team's requirements, it will cause many problems and delays in dealing with the -unwanted upload. For details, please see section . +upload queue (oldstable-security, stable-security +, etc.) without prior authorization from the security team. If the +package does not exactly meet the team's requirements, it will cause many +problems and delays in dealing with the unwanted upload. For details, please +see section .
Other upload queues -The scp queues on ftp-master, and security are mostly unusable due to the login -restrictions on those hosts. +The scp queues on &ftp-master-host;, and security are mostly +unusable due to the login restrictions on those hosts. The anonymous queues on ftp.uni-erlangen.de and ftp.uk.debian.org are currently @@ -450,11 +449,6 @@ ftp.chiark.greenend.org.uk are down permanently, and will not be resurrected. The queue in Japan will be replaced with a new queue on hp.debian.or.jp some day. - -For the time being, the anonymous ftp queue on auric.debian.org (the former -ftp-master) works, but it is deprecated and will be removed at some point in -the future. -
@@ -463,10 +457,11 @@ the future. The Debian archive maintainers are responsible for handling package uploads. For the most part, uploads are automatically handled on a daily basis by the archive maintenance tools, katie. Specifically, updates to -existing packages to the `unstable' distribution are handled automatically. In -other cases, notably new packages, placing the uploaded package into the -distribution is handled manually. When uploads are handled manually, the -change to the archive may take up to a month to occur. Please be patient. +existing packages to the unstable distribution are handled +automatically. In other cases, notably new packages, placing the uploaded +package into the distribution is handled manually. When uploads are handled +manually, the change to the archive may take up to a month to occur. Please +be patient. In any case, you will receive an email notification indicating that the package @@ -499,34 +494,34 @@ actually just hints. The archive maintainers keep track of the canonical sections and priorities for -packages in the override file. If there is a disparity -between the override file and the package's fields as +packages in the override file. If there is a disparity +between the override file and the package's fields as indicated in debian/control, then you will receive an email noting the divergence when the package is installed into the archive. You can either correct your debian/control file for your -next upload, or else you may wish to make a change in the override -file. +next upload, or else you may wish to make a change in the override +file. To alter the actual section that a package is put in, you need to first make sure that the debian/control file in your package is -accurate. Next, send an email override-change@debian.org or -submit a bug against ftp.debian.org -requesting that the section or priority for your package be changed from the -old section or priority to the new one. Be sure to explain your reasoning. +accurate. Next, send an email &email-override; or submit a +bug against ftp.debian.org requesting +that the section or priority for your package be changed from the old section +or priority to the new one. Be sure to explain your reasoning. -For more information about override files, see +For more information about override files, see dpkg-scanpackages 1 and . +url="&url-bts-devel;#maintincorrect">. Note that the Section field describes both the section as well as the subsection, which are described in . If the section is main, it should be omitted. The list of allowable subsections can be found in . +url="&url-debian-policy;ch-archive.html#s-subsections">.
@@ -534,13 +529,13 @@ url="http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-archive.html#s-subsections">Handling bugs Every developer has to be able to work with the Debian bug tracking system. This includes +url="&url-bts;">bug tracking system. This includes knowing how to file bug reports properly (see ), how to update them and reorder them, and how to process and close them. The bug tracking system's features are described in the BTS documentation for +url="&url-bts-devel;">BTS documentation for developers. This includes closing bugs, sending followup messages, assigning severities and tags, marking bugs as forwarded, and other issues. @@ -549,24 +544,24 @@ Operations such as reassigning bugs to other packages, merging separate bug reports about the same issue, or reopening bugs when they are prematurely closed, are handled using the so-called control mail server. All of the commands available on this server are described in the BTS control server +url="&url-bts-control;">BTS control server documentation.
Monitoring bugs If you want to be a good maintainer, you should periodically check the Debian bug tracking system (BTS) for +url="&url-bts;">Debian bug tracking system (BTS) for your packages. The BTS contains all the open bugs against your packages. You can check them by browsing this page: -http://bugs.debian.org/yourlogin@debian.org. +http://&bugs-host;/yourlogin@debian.org. Maintainers interact with the BTS via email addresses at -bugs.debian.org. Documentation on available commands can be -found at , or, if you have -installed the doc-debian package, you -can look at the local files /usr/share/doc/debian/bug-*. +&bugs-host;. Documentation on available +commands can be found at , or, +if you have installed the doc-debian +package, you can look at the local files &file-bts-docs;. Some find it useful to get periodic reports on open bugs. You can add a cron @@ -575,7 +570,7 @@ open bugs against your packages: # ask for weekly reports of bugs in my packages -0 17 * * fri echo index maint address | mail request@bugs.debian.org +&cron-bug-report; Replace address with your official Debian maintainer @@ -588,11 +583,11 @@ address. When responding to bugs, make sure that any discussion you have about bugs is sent both to the original submitter of the bug, and to the bug itself (e.g., -123@bugs.debian.org). If you're writing a new mail and you +123@&bugs-host;). If you're writing a new mail and you don't remember the submitter email address, you can use the -123-submitter@bugs.debian.org email to contact the submitter +123-submitter@&bugs-host; email to contact the submitter and to record your mail within the bug log (that means you -don't need to send a copy of the mail to 123@bugs.debian.org). +don't need to send a copy of the mail to 123@&bugs-host;). If you get a bug which mentions FTBFS, this means Fails to build from source. @@ -600,16 +595,16 @@ Porters frequently use this acronym. Once you've dealt with a bug report (e.g. fixed it), mark it as -done (close it) by sending an explanation message to -123-done@bugs.debian.org. If you're fixing a bug by changing +done (close it) by sending an explanation message to +123-done@&bugs-host;. If you're fixing a bug by changing and uploading the package, you can automate bug closing as described in . You should never close bugs via the bug server -close command sent to -control@bugs.debian.org. If you do so, the original submitter -will not receive any information about why the bug was closed. +close command sent to &email-bts-control;. +If you do so, the original submitter will not receive any information about why +the bug was closed.
@@ -619,10 +614,10 @@ will not receive any information about why the bug was closed. As a package maintainer, you will often find bugs in other packages or have bugs reported against your packages which are actually bugs in other packages. The bug tracking system's features are described in the BTS documentation for Debian +url="&url-bts-devel;">BTS documentation for Debian developers. Operations such as reassigning, merging, and tagging bug reports are described in the BTS control server +url="&url-bts-control;">BTS control server documentation. This section contains some guidelines for managing your own bugs, based on the collective Debian developer experience. @@ -655,7 +650,7 @@ unacceptable, you (or the submitter) may want to require a decision of the technical committee by reassigning the bug to tech-ctte (you may use the clone command of the BTS if you wish to keep it reported against your package). Before doing so, please -read the recommended +read the recommended procedure. @@ -664,7 +659,7 @@ procedure. If the bug is real but it's caused by another package, just reassign the bug to the right package. If you don't know which package it should be reassigned to, you should ask for help on IRC or -on debian-devel@lists.debian.org. Please make sure that the +on &email-debian-devel;. Please make sure that the maintainer(s) of the package the bug is reassigned to know why you reassigned it. @@ -701,14 +696,14 @@ someone, the bug may be closed. If the bug is related to the packaging, you just fix it. If you are not able to fix it yourself, then tag the bug as help. You can also -ask for help on debian-devel@lists.debian.org or -debian-qa@lists.debian.org. If it's an upstream problem, you -have to forward it to the upstream author. Forwarding a bug is not enough, you -have to check at each release if the bug has been fixed or not. If it has, you -just close it, otherwise you have to remind the author about it. If you have -the required skills you can prepare a patch that fixes the bug and send it to -the author at the same time. Make sure to send the patch to the BTS and to tag -the bug as patch. +ask for help on &email-debian-devel; or +&email-debian-qa;. If it's an upstream problem, you have to +forward it to the upstream author. Forwarding a bug is not enough, you have to +check at each release if the bug has been fixed or not. If it has, you just +close it, otherwise you have to remind the author about it. If you have the +required skills you can prepare a patch that fixes the bug and send it to the +author at the same time. Make sure to send the patch to the BTS and to tag the +bug as patch. @@ -723,7 +718,7 @@ several developers working on the same package. -Once a corrected package is available in the unstable +Once a corrected package is available in the unstable distribution, you can close the bug. This can be done automatically, read . @@ -748,7 +743,7 @@ file, following a certain syntax, and the archive maintenance software will close the bugs for you. For example: --cannon (3.1415) unstable; urgency=low +acme-cannon (3.1415) unstable; urgency=low * Frobbed with options (closes: Bug#98339) * Added safety to prevent operator dismemberment, closes: bug#98765, @@ -782,9 +777,9 @@ If you happen to mistype a bug number or forget a bug in the changelog entries, don't hesitate to undo any damage the error caused. To reopen wrongly closed bugs, send a reopen XXX command to the bug tracking system's control address, -control@bugs.debian.org. To close any remaining bugs that were +&email-bts-control;. To close any remaining bugs that were fixed by your upload, email the .changes file to -XXX-done@bugs.debian.org, where XXX +XXX-done@&bugs-host;, where XXX is the bug number, and put Version: YYY and an empty line as the first two lines of the body of the email, where YYY is the first version where the bug has been fixed. @@ -793,7 +788,7 @@ first version where the bug has been fixed. Bear in mind that it is not obligatory to close bugs using the changelog as described above. If you simply want to close bugs that don't have anything to do with an upload you made, do it by emailing an explanation to -XXX-done@bugs.debian.org. Do XXX-done@&bugs-host;. Do not close bugs in the changelog entry of a version if the changes in that version of the package don't have any bearing on the bug. @@ -812,20 +807,22 @@ outstanding security problems, helping maintainers with security problems or fixing them themselves, sending security advisories, and maintaining security.debian.org. + + When you become aware of a security-related bug in a Debian package, whether or not you are the maintainer, collect pertinent information about the problem, and promptly contact the security team at -team@security.debian.org as soon as possible. DO NOT UPLOAD any packages for stable; the security -team will do that. Useful information includes, for example: +&email-security-team; as soon as possible. DO NOT UPLOAD any packages for stable; + the security team will do that. Useful information includes, for example: Which versions of the package are known to be affected by the bug. Check each -version that is present in a supported Debian release, as well as testing and -unstable. +version that is present in a supported Debian release, as well as +testing and unstable. @@ -911,7 +908,8 @@ release of Debian. When sending confidential information to the security team, be sure to mention this fact. -Please note that if secrecy is needed you may not upload a fix to unstable (or +Please note that if secrecy is needed you may not upload a fix to +unstable (or anywhere else, such as a public CVS repository). It is not sufficient to obfuscate the details of the change, as the code itself is public, and can (and will) be examined by the general public. @@ -927,10 +925,10 @@ has become public. Security Advisories Security advisories are only issued for the current, released stable -distribution, and not for testing or unstable. When -released, advisories are sent to the -debian-security-announce@lists.debian.org mailing list and -posted on the security web +distribution, and not for testing +or unstable. When released, advisories are sent to the +&email-debian-security-announce; mailing list and posted on +the security web page. Security advisories are written and posted by the security team. However they certainly do not mind if a maintainer can supply some of the information for them, or write part of the text. Information that should be in @@ -1058,10 +1056,10 @@ Be sure to verify the following items: Target the right distribution in your debian/changelog. -For stable this is stable-security and for testing this is -testing-security, and for the previous stable release, this -is oldstable-security. Do not target -distribution-proposed-updates or +For stable this is stable-security and +for testing this is testing-security, and for the previous +stable release, this is oldstable-security. Do not target +distribution-proposed-updates or stable! @@ -1075,7 +1073,8 @@ The upload should have urgency=high. Make descriptive, meaningful changelog entries. Others will rely on them to determine whether a particular bug was fixed. Always include an external reference, preferably a CVE identifier, so that it can be cross-referenced. -Include the same information in the changelog for unstable, so that it is clear +Include the same information in the changelog for unstable, +so that it is clear that the same bug was fixed, as this is very helpful when verifying that the bug is fixed in the next stable release. If a CVE identifier has not yet been assigned, the security team will request one so that it can be included in the @@ -1088,10 +1087,10 @@ Make sure the version number is proper. It must be greater than the current package, but less than package versions in later distributions. If in doubt, test it with dpkg --compare-versions. Be careful not to re-use a version number that you have already used for a previous upload. For -testing, there must be a higher version in -unstable. If there is none yet (for example, if -testing and unstable have the same -version) you must upload a new version to unstable first. +testing, there must be a higher version in +unstable. If there is none yet (for example, if +testing and unstable have the same +version) you must upload a new version to unstable first. @@ -1135,10 +1134,10 @@ linkend="debootstrap"/> ). Uploading the fixed package Do NOT upload a package to the security -upload queue (oldstable-security, stable-security, etc.) without prior -authorization from the security team. If the package does not exactly meet the -team's requirements, it will cause many problems and delays in dealing with the -unwanted upload. +upload queue (oldstable-security, stable-security +, etc.) without prior authorization from the security team. If the +package does not exactly meet the team's requirements, it will cause many +problems and delays in dealing with the unwanted upload. Do NOT upload your fix to proposed-updates @@ -1168,7 +1167,8 @@ problems that cannot be disclosed yet. If a member of the security team accepts a package, it will be installed on security.debian.org as well as proposed for the proper -distribution-proposed-updates on ftp-master. +distribution-proposed-updates +on &ftp-master-host;. @@ -1189,14 +1189,14 @@ chapter gives guidelines on what to do in these cases. Sometimes a package will change its section. For instance, a package from the `non-free' section might be GPL'd in a later version, in which case the package should be moved to `main' or `contrib'. See the Debian Policy Manual for +url="&url-debian-policy;">Debian Policy Manual for guidelines on what section a package belongs in. If you need to change the section for one of your packages, change the package control information to place the package in the desired section, and re-upload the package (see the Debian Policy Manual for +url="&url-debian-policy;">Debian Policy Manual for details). You must ensure that you include the .orig.tar.gz in your upload (even if you are not uploading a new upstream version), or it will not appear in the new section together with @@ -1205,7 +1205,7 @@ automatically. If it does not, then contact the ftpmasters in order to understand what happened. -If, on the other hand, you need to change the subsection +If, on the other hand, you need to change the subsection of one of your packages (e.g., ``devel'', ``admin''), the procedure is slightly different. Correct the subsection as found in the control file of the package, and re-upload that. Also, you'll need to get the override file updated, as @@ -1221,11 +1221,11 @@ old compatibility library which is no longer required), you need to file a bug against ftp.debian.org asking that the package be removed; as all bugs, this bug should normally have normal severity. Make sure you indicate which distribution the package should be removed from. Normally, you -can only have packages removed from unstable and -experimental. Packages are not removed from -testing directly. Rather, they will be removed +can only have packages removed from unstable and +experimental. Packages are not removed from +testing directly. Rather, they will be removed automatically after the package has been removed from -unstable and no package in testing +unstable and no package in testing depends on it. @@ -1251,18 +1251,18 @@ maintainer. Further information relating to these and other package removal related topics may be found at -and . +and . If in doubt concerning whether a package is disposable, email -debian-devel@lists.debian.org asking for opinions. Also of -interest is the apt-cache program from the apt-cache program from the apt package. When invoked as apt-cache showpkg package, the program will show details for package, including reverse depends. Other useful programs include apt-cache rdepends, apt-rdepends and grep-dctrl. Removal of -orphaned packages is discussed on debian-qa@lists.debian.org. +orphaned packages is discussed on &email-debian-qa;. Once the package has been removed, the package's bugs should be handled. They @@ -1279,7 +1279,7 @@ In the past, it was possible to remove packages from incoming system, this is no longer possible. Instead, you have to upload a new revision of your package with a higher version than the package you want to replace. Both versions will be installed in the archive but only the higher -version will actually be available in unstable since the +version will actually be available in unstable since the previous version will immediately be replaced by the higher. However, if you do proper testing of your packages, the need to replace a package should not occur too often anyway. @@ -1294,7 +1294,7 @@ occur too often anyway. When you make a mistake naming your package, you should follow a two-step process to rename it. First, set your debian/control file to replace and conflict with the obsolete name of the package (see the Debian Policy Manual for +url="&url-debian-policy;">Debian Policy Manual for details). Once you've uploaded the package and the package has moved into the archive, file a bug against ftp.debian.org asking to remove the package with the obsolete name. Do not forget to properly reassign the @@ -1319,15 +1319,15 @@ mirror network. If you can no longer maintain a package, you need to inform others, and see that the package is marked as orphaned. You should set the package maintainer -to Debian QA Group <packages@qa.debian.org> and submit -a bug report against the pseudo package Debian QA Group &orphan-address; and +submit a bug report against the pseudo package wnpp. The bug report should be titled O: package -- short description indicating that the package is now orphaned. The severity of the bug should be set to -normal; if the package has a priority of standard or +normal; if the package has a priority of standard or higher, it should be set to important. If you feel it's necessary, send a copy -to debian-devel@lists.debian.org by putting the address in the +to &email-debian-devel; by putting the address in the X-Debbugs-CC: header of the message (no, don't use CC:, because that way the message's subject won't indicate the bug number). @@ -1337,10 +1337,10 @@ for the moment, then you should instead submit a bug against wnpp and title it RFA: package -- short description. RFA stands for -Request For Adoption. +Request For Adoption. -More information is on the WNPP +More information is on the WNPP web pages. @@ -1349,7 +1349,7 @@ web pages. Adopting a package A list of packages in need of a new maintainer is available in the Work-Needing and Prospective Packages +url="&url-wnpp;">Work-Needing and Prospective Packages list (WNPP). If you wish to take over maintenance of any of the packages listed in the WNPP, please take a look at the aforementioned page for information and procedures. @@ -1367,8 +1367,8 @@ package. Complaints about maintainers should be brought up on the developers' mailing list. If the discussion doesn't end with a positive conclusion, and the issue is of a technical nature, consider bringing it to the attention of the technical committee (see the technical committee web -page for more information). +url="&url-tech-ctte;">technical committee web page for +more information). If you take over an old package, you probably want to be listed as the @@ -1397,8 +1397,8 @@ Porting is the act of building Debian packages for architectures that are different from the original architecture of the package maintainer's binary package. It is a unique and essential activity. In fact, porters do most of the actual compiling of Debian packages. For instance, for a single -i386 binary package, there must be a recompile for each -architecture, which amounts to 12 more builds. +i386 binary package, there must be a recompile for each +architecture, which amounts to &number-of-arches; more builds.
Being kind to porters @@ -1429,7 +1429,8 @@ Make sure that your Build-Depends and Build-Depends-Indep settings in debian/control are set properly. The best way to validate this is to use the debootstrap package -to create an unstable chroot environment (see ). +to create an unstable chroot environment (see ). Within that chrooted environment, install the build-essential package and any package dependencies mentioned in Build-Depends and/or @@ -1443,7 +1444,7 @@ If you can't set up a proper chroot, dpkg-depcheck may be of assistance (see ). -See the Debian Policy +See the Debian Policy Manual for instructions on setting build dependencies. @@ -1451,7 +1452,7 @@ Manual for instructions on setting build dependencies. Don't set architecture to a value other than ``all'' or ``any'' unless you really mean it. In too many cases, maintainers don't follow the instructions -in the Debian Policy +in the Debian Policy Manual. Setting your architecture to ``i386'' is usually incorrect. @@ -1597,15 +1598,16 @@ the architecture is a candidate for inclusion into the next stable release; the release managers decide and announce which architectures are candidates. -If you are a porter doing an NMU for `unstable', the above guidelines for -porting should be followed, with two variations. Firstly, the acceptable -waiting period — the time between when the bug is submitted to the BTS and -when it is OK to do an NMU — is seven days for porters working on the -unstable distribution. This period can be shortened if the problem is critical -and imposes hardship on the porting effort, at the discretion of the porter -group. (Remember, none of this is Policy, just mutually agreed upon -guidelines.) For uploads to stable or testing, please coordinate with the -appropriate release team first. +If you are a porter doing an NMU for unstable, the above +guidelines for porting should be followed, with two variations. Firstly, the +acceptable waiting period — the time between when the bug is submitted to +the BTS and when it is OK to do an NMU — is seven days for porters working +on the unstable distribution. This period can be shortened +if the problem is critical and imposes hardship on the porting effort, at the +discretion of the porter group. (Remember, none of this is Policy, just +mutually agreed upon guidelines.) For uploads to stable or +testing , please coordinate with the appropriate release +team first. Secondly, porters doing source NMUs should make sure that the bug they submit @@ -1644,11 +1646,11 @@ tools; see the package documentation or references for full information. Mailing lists and web pages Web pages containing the status of each port can be found at . +url="&url-debian-ports;">. Each port of Debian has a mailing list. The list of porting mailing lists can -be found at . These +be found at . These lists are used to coordinate porters, and to connect the users of a given port with the porters. @@ -1667,7 +1669,7 @@ linkend="tools-porting"/> . The buildd system is used as a distributed, client-server build distribution system. It is usually used in -conjunction with auto-builders, which are ``slave'' hosts +conjunction with build daemons, which are ``slave'' hosts which simply check out and attempt to auto-build packages which need to be ported. There is also an email interface to the system, which allows porters to ``check out'' a source package (usually one which cannot yet be auto-built) @@ -1686,7 +1688,7 @@ such as andrea and wanna-build. Some of the data produced by buildd which is generally useful to porters is available on the web at . This data includes nightly updated +url="&url-buildd;">. This data includes nightly updated information from andrea (source dependencies) and quinn-diff (packages needing recompilation). @@ -1742,7 +1744,7 @@ In order to prevent autobuilders from needlessly trying to build your package, it must be included in packages-arch-specific, a list used by the wanna-build script. The current version is available as ; +url="&url-cvsweb;srcdep/Packages-arch-specific?cvsroot=dak">; please see the top of the file for whom to contact for changes. @@ -1809,7 +1811,8 @@ work. A NMU should follow all conventions, written down in this section. For an -upload to testing or unstable, this order of steps is recommended: +upload to testing or unstable, this +order of steps is recommended: @@ -1862,9 +1865,10 @@ contact the developer first, and act later. Please see for details. -For the testing distribution, the rules may be changed by the release managers. -Please take additional care, and acknowledge that the usual way for a package -to enter testing is through unstable. +For the testing distribution, the rules may be changed by +the release managers. Please take additional care, and acknowledge that the +usual way for a package to enter testing is through +unstable. For the stable distribution, please take extra care. Of course, the release @@ -1922,9 +1926,9 @@ maintainer of a package should start their debian-revision numbering at `1'. -If you upload a package to testing or stable, sometimes, you need to fork the -version number tree. For this, version numbers like 1.1-3sarge0.1 could be -used. +If you upload a package to testing or stable +, sometimes, you need to fork the version number tree. For this, +version numbers like 1.1-3sarge0.1 could be used.
@@ -2027,9 +2031,9 @@ linkend="collaborative-maint"/> ). Unless you know the maintainer is still active, it is wise to check the package to see if it has been orphaned. The current list of orphaned packages which haven't had their maintainer set correctly is available at . If you perform an NMU on an -improperly orphaned package, please set the maintainer to ``Debian QA Group -<packages@qa.debian.org>''. +url="&url-debian-qa-orphaned;">. If you perform an NMU on an +improperly orphaned package, please set the maintainer to Debian QA Group +<packages@qa.debian.org>. @@ -2053,7 +2057,7 @@ There are two new terms used throughout this section: ``binary-only NMU'' and throughout this document. Both binary-only and source NMUs are similar, since they involve an upload of a package by a developer who is not the official maintainer of that package. That is why it's a -non-maintainer upload. +non-maintainer upload. A source NMU is an upload of a package by a developer who is not the official @@ -2098,7 +2102,9 @@ co-maintainers. Generally there is a primary maintainer and one or more co-maintainers. The primary maintainer is the person whose name is listed in the Maintainer field of the debian/control -file. Co-maintainers are all the other maintainers. +file. Co-maintainers are all the other maintainers, +usually listed in the Uploaders field of the +debian/control file. In its most basic form, the process of adding a new co-maintainer is quite @@ -2116,11 +2122,11 @@ such as CVS or Subversion. Alioth (see Add the co-maintainer's correct maintainer name and address to the -Uploaders field in the global part of the +Uploaders field in the first paragraph of the debian/control file. -: John Buzz <jbuzz@debian.org>, Adam Rex <arex@debian.org> +Uploaders: John Buzz <jbuzz@debian.org>, Adam Rex <arex@debian.org> @@ -2167,90 +2173,93 @@ a false sense of good maintenance.
Basics -Packages are usually installed into the `testing' distribution after they have -undergone some degree of testing in unstable. +Packages are usually installed into the testing distribution +after they have undergone some degree of testing in +unstable. They must be in sync on all architectures and mustn't have dependencies that make them uninstallable; they also have to have generally no known -release-critical bugs at the time they're installed into testing. This way, -`testing' should always be close to being a release candidate. Please see -below for details. +release-critical bugs at the time they're installed into testing +. This way, testing should always be close to +being a release candidate. Please see below for details.
Updates from unstable -The scripts that update the testing distribution are run +The scripts that update the testing distribution are run each day after the installation of the updated packages; these scripts are -called britney. They generate the -Packages files for the testing +called britney. They generate the +Packages files for the testing distribution, but they do so in an intelligent manner; they try to avoid any inconsistency and to use only non-buggy packages. -The inclusion of a package from unstable is conditional on +The inclusion of a package from unstable is conditional on the following: -The package must have been available in unstable for 2, 5 +The package must have been available in unstable for 2, 5 or 10 days, depending on the urgency (high, medium or low). Please note that the urgency is sticky, meaning that the highest urgency uploaded since the -previous testing transition is taken into account. Those delays may be doubled -during a freeze, or testing transitions may be switched off altogether; +previous testing transition is taken into account. Those +delays may be doubled during a freeze, or testing +transitions may be switched off altogether; -It must have the same number or fewer release-critical bugs than the version -currently available in testing; +It must not have new release-critical bugs (RC bugs affecting the version +available in unstable, but not affecting the version in +testing); It must be available on all architectures on which it has previously been built -in unstable. may be of interest to check that -information; +in unstable. may be of interest +to check that information; It must not break any dependency of a package which is already available in -testing; +testing; The packages on which it depends must either be available in -testing or they must be accepted into -testing at the same time (and they will be if they fulfill +testing or they must be accepted into +testing at the same time (and they will be if they fulfill all the necessary criteria); -To find out whether a package is progressing into testing or not, see the -testing script output on the web page of the testing +To find out whether a package is progressing into testing +or not, see the testing script output on the web page of the testing distribution, or use the program grep-excuses which is in the devscripts package. This utility can easily be used in a crontab 5 to keep yourself informed of the progression of your packages into -testing. +testing. The update_excuses file does not always give the precise reason why the package is refused; you may have to find it on your own by looking for what would break with the inclusion of the package. The testing web page gives some +url="&url-testing-maint;">testing web page gives some more information about the usual problems which may be causing such troubles. -Sometimes, some packages never enter testing because the +Sometimes, some packages never enter testing because the set of inter-relationship is too complicated and cannot be sorted out by the scripts. See below for details. @@ -2262,11 +2271,13 @@ shows build dependencies which are not considered by britney.
out-of-date -For the testing migration script, outdated means: There are different versions -in unstable for the release architectures (except for the architectures in -fuckedarches; fuckedarches is a list of architectures that don't keep up (in -update_out.py), but currently, it's empty). outdated has nothing whatsoever to -do with the architectures this package has in testing. + +For the testing migration script, outdated means: There are +different versions in unstable for the release architectures +(except for the architectures in fuckedarches; fuckedarches is a list of +architectures that don't keep up (in update_out.py), but currently, it's +empty). outdated has nothing whatsoever to do with the architectures this +package has in testing. Consider this example: @@ -2295,12 +2306,14 @@ Consider this example: -The package is out of date on alpha in unstable, and will not go to testing. -And removing foo from testing would not help at all, the package is still out -of date on alpha, and will not propagate to testing. +The package is out of date on alpha in unstable, and will +not go to testing. Removing the package would not help at all, the +package is still out of date on alpha, and will not +propagate to testing. -However, if ftp-master removes a package in unstable (here on arm): +However, if ftp-master removes a package in unstable (here +on arm): @@ -2330,8 +2343,8 @@ However, if ftp-master removes a package in unstable (here on arm): In this case, the package is up to date on all release architectures in -unstable (and the extra hurd-i386 doesn't matter, as it's not a release -architecture). +unstable (and the extra hurd-i386 +doesn't matter, as it's not a release architecture). Sometimes, the question is raised if it is possible to allow packages in that @@ -2345,17 +2358,19 @@ maintain glibc or so.) Sometimes, a package is removed to allow another package in: This happens only to allow another package to go in if it's ready in every -other sense. Suppose e.g. that a cannot be installed -with the new version of b; then a may -be removed to allow b in. +other sense. Suppose e.g. that a cannot be installed +with the new version of b; then a may +be removed to allow b in. -Of course, there is another reason to remove a package from testing: It's just -too buggy (and having a single RC-bug is enough to be in this state). +Of course, there is another reason to remove a package from testing +: It's just too buggy (and having a single RC-bug is enough to be +in this state). -Furthermore, if a package has been removed from unstable, and no package in -testing depends on it any more, then it will automatically be removed. +Furthermore, if a package has been removed from unstable, +and no package in testing depends on it any more, then it +will automatically be removed.
@@ -2363,8 +2378,8 @@ testing depends on it any more, then it will automatically be removed. circular dependencies A situation which is not handled very well by britney is if package -a depends on the new version of package -b, and vice versa. +a depends on the new version of package +b, and vice versa. An example of this is: @@ -2393,32 +2408,34 @@ An example of this is: -Neither package a nor package b is +Neither package a nor package b is considered for update. Currently, this requires some manual hinting from the release team. Please -contact them by sending mail to debian-release@lists.debian.org -if this happens to one of your packages. +contact them by sending mail to &email-debian-release; if this +happens to one of your packages.
influence of package in testing -Generally, there is nothing that the status of a package in testing means for -transition of the next version from unstable to testing, with two exceptions: +Generally, there is nothing that the status of a package in testing + means for transition of the next version from unstable + to testing, with two exceptions: If the RC-bugginess of the package goes down, it may go in even if it is still -RC-buggy. The second exception is if the version of the package in testing is -out of sync on the different arches: Then any arch might just upgrade to the -version of the source package; however, this can happen only if the package was -previously forced through, the arch is in fuckedarches, or there was no binary -package of that arch present in unstable at all during the testing migration. +RC-buggy. The second exception is if the version of the package in +testing is out of sync on the different arches: Then any arch might +just upgrade to the version of the source package; however, this can happen +only if the package was previously forced through, the arch is in fuckedarches, +or there was no binary package of that arch present in unstable + at all during the testing migration. -In summary this means: The only influence that a package being in testing has -on a new version of the same package is that the new version might go in -easier. +In summary this means: The only influence that a package being in +testing has on a new version of the same package is that the new +version might go in easier.
@@ -2437,23 +2454,23 @@ part of britney.) (There is a similar thing for binary-only updates, but this is not described here. If you're interested in that, please peruse the code.) -Now, the more complex part happens: Britney tries to update testing with the -valid candidates; first, each package alone, and then larger and even larger -sets of packages together. Each try is accepted if testing is not more -uninstallable after the update than before. (Before and after this part, some -hints are processed; but as only release masters can hint, this is probably not -so important for you.) +Now, the more complex part happens: Britney tries to update testing + with the valid candidates; first, each package alone, and then +larger and even larger sets of packages together. Each try is accepted if +testing is not more uninstallable after the update than +before. (Before and after this part, some hints are processed; but as only +release masters can hint, this is probably not so important for you.) If you want to see more details, you can look it up on -merkel:/org/ftp.debian.org/testing/update_out/ (or there in -~aba/testing/update_out to see a setup with a smaller packages file). Via web, -it's at +merkel:/org/&ftp-debian-org;/testing/update_out/ (or +in merkel:~aba/testing/update_out to see a setup with +a smaller packages file). Via web, it's at The hints are available via . +url="http://&ftp-master-host;/testing/hints/">. @@ -2462,31 +2479,34 @@ url="http://ftp-master.debian.org/testing/hints/">.
Direct updates to testing -The testing distribution is fed with packages from unstable according to the -rules explained above. However, in some cases, it is necessary to upload -packages built only for testing. For that, you may want to upload to -testing-proposed-updates. +The testing distribution is fed with packages from +unstable according to the rules explained above. However, +in some cases, it is necessary to upload packages built only for +testing. For that, you may want to upload to +testing-proposed-updates. Keep in mind that packages uploaded there are not automatically processed, they have to go through the hands of the release manager. So you'd better have a good reason to upload there. In order to know what a good reason is in the release managers' eyes, you should read the instructions that they regularly -give on debian-devel-announce@lists.debian.org. +give on &email-debian-devel-announce;. -You should not upload to testing-proposed-updates when you -can update your packages through unstable. If you can't -(for example because you have a newer development version in unstable), you may -use this facility, but it is recommended that you ask for authorization from -the release manager first. Even if a package is frozen, updates through -unstable are possible, if the upload via unstable does not pull in any new -dependencies. +You should not upload to testing-proposed-updates when you +can update your packages through unstable. If you can't +(for example because you have a newer development version in unstable +), you may use this facility, but it is recommended that you ask for +authorization from the release manager first. Even if a package is frozen, +updates through unstable are possible, if the upload via +unstable does not pull in any new dependencies. -Version numbers are usually selected by adding the codename of the testing -distribution and a running number, like 1.2sarge1 for the first upload through -testing-proposed-updates of package version 1.2. +Version numbers are usually selected by adding the codename of the +testing distribution and a running number, like +1.2sarge1 for the first upload through +testing-proposed-updates of package version +1.2. Please make sure you didn't miss any of these items in your upload: @@ -2495,7 +2515,8 @@ Please make sure you didn't miss any of these items in your upload: Make sure that your package really needs to go through -testing-proposed-updates, and can't go through unstable; +testing-proposed-updates, and can't go through +unstable; @@ -2510,28 +2531,27 @@ Make sure that you included an appropriate explanation in the changelog; -Make sure that you've written testing or -testing-proposed-updates into your target distribution; +Make sure that you've written testing or +testing-proposed-updates into your target distribution; Make sure that you've built and tested your package in -testing, not in unstable; +testing, not in unstable; Make sure that your version number is higher than the version in -testing and testing-proposed-updates, -and lower than in unstable; +testing and testing-proposed-updates, +and lower than in unstable; After uploading and successful build on all platforms, contact the release team -at debian-release@lists.debian.org and ask them to approve your -upload. +at &email-debian-release; and ask them to approve your upload. @@ -2547,16 +2567,18 @@ currently, these are critical, grave, and serious bugs. Such bugs are presumed to have an impact on the chances that the package will -be released with the stable release of Debian: in general, if a package has -open release-critical bugs filed on it, it won't get into testing, and -consequently won't be released in stable. +be released with the stable release of Debian: in general, +if a package has open release-critical bugs filed on it, it won't get into +testing, and consequently won't be released in +stable. -The unstable bug count are all release-critical bugs without either any -release-tag (such as potato, woody) or with release-tag sid; also, only if they -are neither fixed nor set to sarge-ignore. The testing bug count for a package -is considered to be roughly the bug count of unstable count at the last point -when the testing version equalled the unstable version. +The unstable bug count are all release-critical bugs without +either any release-tag (such as potato, woody) or with release-tag sid; also, +only if they are neither fixed nor set to sarge-ignore. The testing + bug count for a package is considered to be roughly the bug count of +unstable count at the last point when the testing +version equalled the unstable version. This will change post-sarge, as soon as we have versions in the bug tracking @@ -2565,18 +2587,21 @@ system.
-How could installing a package into testing possibly break other packages? +How could installing a package into <literal>testing</literal> possibly +break other packages? The structure of the distribution archives is such that they can only contain one version of a package; a package is defined by its name. So when the source -package acmefoo is installed into testing, along with its binary packages -acme-foo-bin, acme-bar-bin, libacme-foo1 and libacme-foo-dev, the old version -is removed. +package acmefoo is installed into testing, +along with its binary packages acme-foo-bin, +acme-bar-bin, libacme-foo1 and +libacme-foo-dev, the old version is removed. However, the old version may have provided a binary package with an old soname -of a library, such as libacme-foo0. Removing the old acmefoo will remove -libacme-foo0, which will break any packages which depend on it. +of a library, such as libacme-foo0. Removing the old +acmefoo will remove libacme-foo0, which +will break any packages which depend on it. Evidently, this mainly affects packages which provide changing sets of binary @@ -2588,7 +2613,8 @@ the ==, <=, or << varieties. When the set of binary packages provided by a source package change in this way, all the packages that depended on the old binaries will have to be updated to depend on the new binaries instead. Because installing such a source -package into testing breaks all the packages that depended on it in testing, +package into testing breaks all the packages that depended on +it in testing, some care has to be taken now: all the depending packages must be updated and ready to be installed themselves so that they won't be broken, and, once everything is ready, manual intervention by the release manager or an assistant