X-Git-Url: http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/ucgi/~ianmdlvl/git?a=blobdiff_plain;f=pkgs.dbk;h=628300063d01d4168c36e58c160079f637ab7a70;hb=edd829c897de8228d29eb2b84340babd87f2142d;hp=38ab0ddcec69e4384935073ed72c6f229bdb947c;hpb=d83ad0ef98fc97553ef37b7a9e1fe63f7d16096f;p=developers-reference.git diff --git a/pkgs.dbk b/pkgs.dbk index 38ab0dd..6283000 100644 --- a/pkgs.dbk +++ b/pkgs.dbk @@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ already is a volunteer, so efforts may be shared. It lets the rest of the maintainers know more about the package than the one line description and the usual changelog entry ``Initial release'' that gets -posted to debian-devel-changes. +posted to &email-debian-devel-changes;. @@ -284,16 +284,25 @@ It is not possible to upload a package into several distributions at the same time.
-Special case: uploads to the <literal>stable</literal> distribution +Special case: uploads to the <literal>stable</literal> and +<literal>oldstable</literal> distributions Uploading to stable means that the package will transfered -to the proposed-updates-new-queue for review by the stable +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 point release. +To ensure that your upload will be accepted, you should discuss the changes +with the stable release team before you upload. For that, send a mail to +the &email-debian-release; mailing list, including the patch you want to +apply to the package version currently in stable. Always +be verbose and detailed in your changelog entries for uploads to the +stable distribution. + + Extra care should be taken when uploading to stable. Basically, a package should only be uploaded to stable if one of the following happens: @@ -321,7 +330,10 @@ 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. See for detailed information on handling -security problems. +security problems. If the security teams deems the problem to be too +benign to be fixed through a DSA, the stable release +managers are usually willing to include your fix nonetheless in a regular +upload to stable. Changing anything else in the package that isn't important is discouraged, @@ -338,19 +350,9 @@ rejected. Making changes to dependencies of other packages (by messing with making those other packages uninstallable, is strongly discouraged. -The Release Team (which can be reached at -&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 -that the uploaded package fits the needs of the next point release. +Uploads to the oldstable distributions are possible as +long as it hasn't been archived. The same rules as for stable + apply.
@@ -436,8 +438,9 @@ see section .
Other upload queues -The scp queues on &ftp-master-host;, and security are mostly -unusable due to the login restrictions on those hosts. +The scp queues on &ftp-master-host;, and +security.debian.org 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 @@ -805,7 +808,7 @@ Due to their sensitive nature, security-related bugs must be handled carefully. The Debian Security Team exists to coordinate this activity, keeping track of outstanding security problems, helping maintainers with security problems or fixing them themselves, sending security advisories, and maintaining -security.debian.org. +security.debian.org. @@ -1104,11 +1107,12 @@ uploads as well. -Unless the upstream source has been uploaded to security.debian.org before (by -a previous security update), build the upload with full upstream source -(dpkg-buildpackage -sa). If there has been a previous -upload to security.debian.org with the same upstream version, you may upload -without upstream source (dpkg-buildpackage -sd). +Unless the upstream source has been uploaded to security.debian.org + before (by a previous security update), build the upload with full +upstream source (dpkg-buildpackage -sa). If there has been +a previous upload to security.debian.org with the same +upstream version, you may upload without upstream source ( +dpkg-buildpackage -sd). @@ -1140,9 +1144,10 @@ 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 -without coordinating with the security team. Packages from security.debian.org -will be copied into the proposed-updates directory automatically. If a package +Do NOT upload your fix to +proposed-updates without coordinating with the security team. +Packages from security.debian.org will be copied into +the proposed-updates directory automatically. If a package with the same or a higher version number is already installed into the archive, the security update will be rejected by the archive system. That way, the stable distribution will end up without a security update for this package @@ -1166,7 +1171,7 @@ 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 +security.debian.org as well as proposed for the proper distribution-proposed-updates on &ftp-master-host;. @@ -1219,14 +1224,36 @@ described in . If for some reason you want to completely remove a package (say, if it is an 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 +as all bugs, this bug should normally have normal severity. +The bug title should be in the form RM: package + [architecture list] -- +reason, where package +is the package to be removed and reason is a +short summary of the reason for the removal request. +[architecture list] is optional and only needed +if the removal request only applies to some architectures, not all. Note +that the reportbug will create a title conforming +to these rules when you use it to report a bug against the +ftp.debian.org pseudo-package. + + + +If you want to remove a package you maintain, you should note this in +the bug title by prepending ROM (Request Of Maintainer). +There are several other standard acronyms used in the reasoning for a package +removal, see +for a complete list. That page also provides a convenient overview of +pending removal requests. + + + +Note that removals can only be done for the unstable +, experimental and stable + distribution. 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 -depends on it. +unstable and no package in testing + depends on it. There is one exception when an explicit removal request is not necessary: If a @@ -1246,7 +1273,12 @@ supersedes the one to be removed. Usually you only ask for the removal of a package maintained by yourself. If you want to remove another package, you have to get the approval of its -maintainer. +maintainer. Should the package be orphaned and thus have no maintainer, +you should first discuss the removal request on &email-debian-qa;. If +there is a consensus that the package should be removed, you should +reassign and retitle the O: bug filed against the +wnpp package instead of filing a new bug as +removal request. Further information relating to these and other package removal related topics @@ -1396,9 +1428,10 @@ you are not a porter, you should read most of this chapter. 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 &number-of-arches; more builds. +the actual compiling of Debian packages. For instance, when a maintainer +uploads a (portable) source packages with binaries for the i386 + architecture, it will be built for each of the other architectures, +amounting to &number-of-arches; more builds.
Being kind to porters @@ -1450,10 +1483,12 @@ 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 -Manual. Setting your architecture to ``i386'' is usually incorrect. +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 Manual. Setting your +architecture to only one architecture (such as i386 +or amd64) is usually incorrect. @@ -1468,7 +1503,7 @@ scratch with dpkg-buildpackage. Make sure you don't ship your source package with the debian/files or debian/substvars -files. They should be removed by the `clean' target of +files. They should be removed by the clean target of debian/rules. @@ -1484,7 +1519,9 @@ even if it's the same architecture. Don't depend on the package you're building being installed already (a sub-case -of the above issue). +of the above issue). There are, of course, exceptions to this rule, but be +aware that any case like this needs manual bootstrapping and cannot be done +by automated package builders. @@ -1497,11 +1534,11 @@ standardize on different compilers. -Make sure your debian/rules contains separate ``binary-arch'' and -``binary-indep'' targets, as the Debian Policy Manual requires. Make sure that -both targets work independently, that is, that you can call the target without -having called the other before. To test this, try to run -dpkg-buildpackage -B. +Make sure your debian/rules contains separate binary-arch +and binary-indep targets, as the Debian Policy Manual +requires. Make sure that both targets work independently, that is, that you +can call the target without having called the other before. To test this, +try to run dpkg-buildpackage -B. @@ -1528,7 +1565,8 @@ The way to invoke dpkg-buildpackage is as -mporter-email. Of course, set porter-email to your email address. This will do a binary-only build of only the architecture-dependent portions of the package, -using the `binary-arch' target in debian/rules. +using the binary-arch target in debian/rules +. If you are working on a Debian machine for your porting efforts and you need to @@ -1545,14 +1583,15 @@ which the package was built was not good enough (outdated or obsolete library, bad compiler, ...). Then you may just need to recompile it in an updated environment. However, you have to bump the version number in this case, so that the old bad package can be replaced in the Debian archive -(katie refuses to install new packages if they don't have a +(dak refuses to install new packages if they don't have a version number greater than the currently available one). You have to make sure that your binary-only NMU doesn't render the package uninstallable. This could happen when a source package generates -arch-dependent and arch-independent packages that depend on each other via -$(Source-Version). +arch-dependent and arch-independent packages that have inter-dependencies +generated using dpkg's substitution variable $(Source-Version) +. Despite the required modification of the changelog, these are called @@ -1568,16 +1607,19 @@ source code). The ``magic'' for a recompilation-only NMU is triggered by using a suffix -appended to the package version number, following the form b<number>. +appended to the package version number, following the form +bnumber. For instance, if the latest version you are recompiling against was version -``2.9-3'', your NMU should carry a version of ``2.9-3+b1''. If the latest -version was ``3.4+b1'' (i.e, a native package with a previous recompilation -NMU), your NMU should have a version number of ``3.4+b2''. In -the past, such NMUs used the third-level number on the Debian part of the -revision to denote their recompilation-only status; however, this syntax was -ambiguous with native packages and did not allow proper ordering of -recompile-only NMUs, source NMUs, and security NMUs on the same package, and -has therefore been abandoned in favor of this new syntax. +2.9-3, your binary-only NMU should carry a version of +2.9-3+b1. If the latest version was 3.4+b1 + (i.e, a native package with a previous recompilation NMU), your +binary-only NMU should have a version number of 3.4+b2. + In the past, such NMUs used the third-level number on the +Debian part of the revision to denote their recompilation-only status; +however, this syntax was ambiguous with native packages and did not allow +proper ordering of recompile-only NMUs, source NMUs, and security NMUs on +the same package, and has therefore been abandoned in favor of this new syntax. + Similar to initial porter uploads, the correct way of invoking @@ -1611,11 +1653,11 @@ team first. Secondly, porters doing source NMUs should make sure that the bug they submit -to the BTS should be of severity `serious' or greater. This ensures that a -single source package can be used to compile every supported Debian -architecture by release time. It is very important that we have one version of -the binary and source package for all architecture in order to comply with many -licenses. +to the BTS should be of severity serious or greater. This +ensures that a single source package can be used to compile every supported +Debian architecture by release time. It is very important that we have one +version of the binary and source package for all architectures in order to +comply with many licenses. Porters should try to avoid patches which simply kludge around bugs in the @@ -1664,34 +1706,30 @@ linkend="tools-porting"/> .
-
-<systemitem role="package">buildd</systemitem> +
+<systemitem role="package">wanna-build</systemitem> -The buildd system is used as a +The wanna-build system is used as a distributed, client-server build distribution system. It is usually used in -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) -and work on it. +conjunction with build daemons running the buildd + program. Build daemons are ``slave'' hosts +which contact the central wanna-build +system to receive a list of packages that need to be built. -buildd is not yet available as a -package; however, most porting efforts are either using it currently or -planning to use it in the near future. The actual automated builder is -packaged as sbuild, see its description -in . The complete buildd system also collects a number of as yet -unpackaged components which are currently very useful and in use continually, -such as andrea and wanna-build. +wanna-build is not yet available as a +package; however, all Debian porting efforts are using it for automated +package building. The tool used to do the actual package builds, sbuild is available as a package, see its +description in . Please note that the packaged +version is not the same as the one used on build daemons, but it is close +enough to reproduce problems. -Some of the data produced by buildd -which is generally useful to porters is available on the web at . This data includes nightly updated -information from andrea (source dependencies) and -quinn-diff (packages needing -recompilation). +Most of the data produced by wanna-build + which is generally useful to porters is available on the +web at . This data includes nightly +updated statistics, queueing information and logs for build attempts. We are quite proud of this system, since it has so many possible uses. @@ -1702,7 +1740,7 @@ also enable Debian to recompile entire distributions quickly. The buildds admins of each arch can be contacted at the mail address -$arch@buildd.debian.org. +arch@buildd.debian.org.
@@ -1714,8 +1752,8 @@ $arch@buildd.debian.org. Some packages still have issues with building and/or working on some of the architectures supported by Debian, and cannot be ported at all, or not within a reasonable amount of time. An example is a package that is SVGA-specific (only -i386), or uses other hardware-specific features not supported on all -architectures. +available for i386 and amd64), or uses +other hardware-specific features not supported on all architectures. In order to prevent broken packages from being uploaded to the archive, and @@ -1733,9 +1771,9 @@ allow the package to build as soon as the required functionality is available. Additionally, if you believe the list of supported architectures is pretty -constant, you should change 'any' to a list of supported architectures in -debian/control. This way, the build will fail also, and indicate this to a -human reader without actually trying. +constant, you should change any to a list of supported +architectures in debian/control. This way, the build will +fail also, and indicate this to a human reader without actually trying. @@ -1773,8 +1811,8 @@ non-maintainer upload, or NMU. This section handles only source NMUs, i.e. NMUs which upload a new version of the package. For binary-only NMUs by porters or QA members, please see . If a buildd builds and uploads a package, that -too is strictly speaking a binary NMU. See for some -more information. +too is strictly speaking a binary NMU. See for +some more information. The main reason why NMUs are done is when a developer needs to fix another @@ -2190,8 +2228,8 @@ being a release candidate. Please see below for details. Updates from unstable 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 +twice each day, right after the installation of the updated packages; these +scripts are 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. @@ -2265,7 +2303,7 @@ scripts. See below for details. Some further dependency analysis is shown on — but be warned, this page also +url="http://release.debian.org/migration/"> — but be warned, this page also shows build dependencies which are not considered by britney.
@@ -2275,9 +2313,9 @@ shows build dependencies which are not considered by britney. 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. +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: @@ -2455,11 +2493,13 @@ 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.) + with the valid candidates. For that, britney tries to add each +valid candidate to the testing distribution. If the number of uninstallable +packages in testing doesn't increase, the package is +accepted. From that point on, the accepted package is considered to be part +of testing, such that all subsequent installability +tests include this package. Hints from the release team are processed +before or after this main run, depending on the exact type. If you want to see more details, you can look it up on @@ -2563,7 +2603,8 @@ at &email-debian-release; and ask them to approve your upload. What are release-critical bugs, and how do they get counted? All bugs of some higher severities are by default considered release-critical; -currently, these are critical, grave, and serious bugs. +currently, these are critical, grave and +serious bugs. Such bugs are presumed to have an impact on the chances that the package will @@ -2573,16 +2614,10 @@ if a package has open release-critical bugs filed on it, it won't get into 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. - - -This will change post-sarge, as soon as we have versions in the bug tracking -system. +The unstable bug count are all release-critical bugs which +are marked to apply to package/version + combinations that are available in unstable for a release +architecture. The testing bug count is defined analogously.
@@ -2622,7 +2657,7 @@ is normally required. If you are having problems with complicated groups of packages like this, -contact debian-devel or debian-release for help. +contact &email-debian-devel; or &email-debian-release; for help.