<!DOCTYPE debiandoc PUBLIC "-//DebianDoc//DTD DebianDoc//EN" [
<!-- include version information so we don't have to hard code it
within the document -->
- <!entity % versiondata SYSTEM "version.ent"> %versiondata;
- <!-- common, language independant entities -->
- <!entity % commondata SYSTEM "common.ent" > %commondata;
+ <!ENTITY % versiondata SYSTEM "version.ent"> %versiondata;
+ <!-- common, language independent entities -->
+ <!ENTITY % commondata SYSTEM "common.ent" > %commondata;
<!-- CVS revision of this document -->
- <!entity cvs-rev "$Revision: 1.164 $">
+ <!ENTITY cvs-rev "$Revision: 1.232 $">
+
<!-- if you are translating this document, please notate the CVS
- revision of the developers reference here -->
- <!--
- <!entity cvs-en-rev "X.YY">
- -->
+ revision of the original developer's reference in cvs-en-rev -->
+ <!-- <!ENTITY cvs-en-rev "X.YZW"> -->
- <!-- -->
- <!entity FIXME "<em>FIXME:</em> ">
+ <!-- how to mark a section that needs more work -->
+ <!ENTITY FIXME "<em>FIXME:</em> ">
]>
<debiandoc>
<book>
<title>Debian Developer's Reference
- <author>Adam Di Carlo, current maintainer <email>aph@debian.org</email>
- <author>Raphaël Hertzog, co-maintainer <email>hertzog@debian.org</email>
- <author>Christian Schwarz <email>schwarz@debian.org</email>
- <author>Ian Jackson <email>ijackson@gnu.ai.mit.edu</email>
+ <author>Developer's Reference Team &email-devel-ref;
+ <author>Adam Di Carlo, editor
+ <author>Raphaël Hertzog
+ <author>Christian Schwarz
+ <author>Ian Jackson
<version>ver. &version;, &date-en;
<copyright>
<copyrightsummary>
copyright © 1998—2003 Adam Di Carlo</copyrightsummary>
<copyrightsummary>
-copyright © 2002 Raphaël Hertzog</copyrightsummary>
+copyright © 2002—2003 Raphaël Hertzog</copyrightsummary>
<copyrightsummary>
copyright © 1997, 1998 Christian Schwarz</copyrightsummary>
<p>
<!-- FIXME: rewrites -->
<p>
The procedures discussed within include how to become a maintainer
-(<ref id="new-maintainer">); how to upload new packages (<ref
-id="upload">); how and when to do ports and interim releases of other
-maintainers' packages (<ref id="nmu">); how to move, remove, or orphan
-packages (<ref id="archive-manip">); and how to handle bug reports
-(<ref id="bug-handling">).
+(<ref id="new-maintainer">); how to create new packages
+(<ref id="newpackage">) and how to upload packages (<ref id="upload">);
+how to handle bug reports (<ref id="bug-handling">); how to move,
+remove, or orphan packages (<ref id="archive-manip">); how to port
+packages (<ref id="porting">); and how and when to do interim
+releases of other maintainers' packages (<ref id="nmu">).
<p>
The resources discussed in this reference include the mailing lists
(<ref id="mailing-lists">) and servers (<ref id="server-machines">); a
packages (<ref id="tools">).
<p>
It should be clear that this reference does not discuss the technical
-details of the Debian package nor how to generate Debian packages.
+details of Debian packages nor how to generate them.
Nor does this reference detail the standards to which Debian software
must comply. All of such information can be found in the <url
id="&url-debian-policy;" name="Debian Policy Manual">.
are happy with the packaging work you have done. You can find a sponsor
by mailing the &email-debian-mentors; mailing list, describing your
package and yourself and asking for a sponsor (see <ref id="sponsoring">
-for more information on sponsoring). On the other hand, if you are
+and <url id="&url-mentors;"> for more information on sponsoring).
+On the other hand, if you are
interested in porting Debian to alternative architectures or kernels
you can subscribe to port specific mailing lists and ask there how to
get started. Finally, if you are interested in documentation or
preparations you have to do before you can register to become a Debian
developer.
-For example, before you apply, you have to to read the <url
+For example, before you apply, you have to read the <url
id="&url-social-contract;" name="Debian Social Contract">.
Registering as a developer means that you agree with and pledge to
uphold the Debian Social Contract; it is very important that
to verify your application (an <em>advocate</em>). After you have
contributed to Debian for a while, and you want to apply to become a
registered developer, an existing developer with whom you
-have worked over the past months has to express his belief that you
+have worked over the past months has to express their belief that you
can contribute to Debian successfully.
<p>
When you have found an advocate, have your GnuPG key signed and have
might be able find a sponsor to upload your package for you. Sponsors
are people who are official Debian maintainers, and who are willing to
criticize and upload your packages for you. Those who are seeking a
-sponsor can request one at <url id="&url-sponsors;">.
+sponsor can request one at <url id="&url-sponsors;">. Please read the
+inofficial debian-mentors FAQ at <url id="&url-mentors;"> first.
<p>
If you wish to be a mentor and/or sponsor, more information is
available in <ref id="newmaint">.
<sect id="user-maint">Maintaining your Debian information
<p>
-There's a LDAP database containing information about all
-developers, you can access it at <url id="&url-debian-db;">. You can
-update your password (this password is propagated to most of the machines
-that are accessible to you), your address, your country, the latitude and
-longitude of the point where you live, phone and fax numbers, your
-preferred shell, your IRC nickname, your web page and the email that
-you're using as alias for your debian.org email. Most of the information
-is not accessible to the public, for more details about this
-database, please read its online documentation that you can find
-at <url id="&url-debian-db-doc;">.
+There's a LDAP database containing information about Debian developers at
+<url id="&url-debian-db;">. You should enter your information there and
+update it as it changes. Most notably, make sure that the address where your
+debian.org email gets forwarded to is always up to date, as well as the
+address where you get your debian-private subscription if you choose to
+subscribe there.
<p>
-You have to keep the information available there up-to-date.
+For more information about the database, please see <ref id="devel-db">.
+
+
<sect id="key-maint">Maintaining your public key
<p>
<sect id="voting">Voting
<p>
-Even if Debian is not always a real democracy, Debian has democratic
-tools and uses a democratic process to elect its leader or
-to approve a general resolution. Those processes are described in
-the <url id="&url-constitution;" name="Debian Constitution">.
+Even though Debian isn't really a democracy, we use a democratic
+process to elect our leaders and to approve general resolutions.
+These procedures are defined by the
+<url id="&url-constitution;" name="Debian Constitution">.
<p>
-Democratic processes work well only if everybody take part in the
-vote, that's why you have to vote. To be able to vote you have to
-subscribe to &email-debian-devel-announce; since call for votes are sent
-there. If you want to follow the debate preceding a vote, you
-may want to subscribe to &email-debian-vote;.
+Other than the yearly leader election, votes are not routinely held, and
+they are not undertaken lightly. Each proposal is first discussed on
+the &email-debian-vote; mailing list and it requires several endorsements
+before the project secretary starts the voting procedure.
+ <p>
+You don't have to track the pre-vote discussions, as the secretary will
+issue several calls for votes on &email-debian-devel-announce; (and all
+developers are expected to be subscribed to that list). Democracy doesn't
+work well if people don't take part in the vote, which is why we encourage
+all developers to vote. Voting is conducted via GPG-signed/encrypted emails
+messages.
<p>
The list of all the proposals (past and current) is available on the
-<url id="&url-vote;" name="Debian Voting Information"> page. You will find
-there additional information about how to make a vote proposal.
+<url id="&url-vote;" name="Debian Voting Information"> page, along with
+information on how to make, second and vote on proposals.
<sect id="inform-vacation">Going on vacation gracefully
<p>
-Most developers take vacations, and usually this means that they can't
-work for Debian and they can't be reached by email if any problem occurs.
-The other developers need to know that you're on vacation so that they'll
-do whatever is needed when such a problem occurs. Usually this means that
-other developers are allowed to NMU (see <ref id="nmu">) your package if a
-big problem (release critical bugs, security update, etc.) occurs while
-you're on vacation.
- <p>
-In order to inform the other developers, there's two things that you should do.
-First send a mail to &email-debian-private; giving the period of time when
-you will be on vacation. You can also give some special instructions on what to
-do if any problem occurs. Be aware that some people don't care for vacation
-notices and don't want to read them; you should prepend "[VAC] " to the
-subject of your message so that it can be easily filtered.
- <p>
-Next you should update your information
-available in the Debian LDAP database and mark yourself as ``on vacation''
-(this information is only accessible to debian developers). Don't forget
-to remove the ``on vacation'' flag when you come back!
+It is common for developers to have periods of absence, whether those are
+planned vacations or simply being buried in other work. The important thing
+to notice is that the other developers need to know that you're on vacation
+so that they can do whatever is needed if a problem occurs with your
+packages or other duties in the project.
+ <p>
+Usually this means that other developers are allowed to NMU (see
+<ref id="nmu">) your package if a big problem (release critical bugs,
+security update, etc.) occurs while you're on vacation. Sometimes it's
+nothing as critical as that, but it's still appropriate to let the others
+know that you're unavailable.
+ <p>
+In order to inform the other developers, there are two things that you should do.
+First send a mail to &email-debian-private; with "[VAC] " prepended to the
+subject of your message<footnote>This is so that the message can be easily
+filtered by people who don't want to read vacation notices.</footnote>
+and state the period of time when you will be on vacation. You can also give
+some special instructions on what to do if a problem occurs.
+ <p>
+The other thing to do is to mark yourself as "on vacation" in the
+<qref id="devel-db">Debian developers' LDAP database</qref> (this
+information is only accessible to Debian developers).
+Don't forget to remove the "on vacation" flag when you come back!
+
<sect id="upstream-coordination">Coordination with upstream developers
<p>
A big part of your job as Debian maintainer will be to stay in contact
with the upstream developers. Debian users will sometimes report bugs
-to the Bug Tracking System that are not specific to Debian. You
-must forward these bug reports to the upstream developers so that
-they can be fixed in a future release. It's not your job to fix
-non-Debian specific bugs. However, if you are able to do so, you are
-encouraged to contribute to upstream development of the package by
-providing a fix for the bug. Debian users and developers will often
-submit patches to fix upstream bugs, and you should evaluate and
-forward these patches upstream.
+that are not specific to Debian to our bug tracking system. You
+have to forward these bug reports to the upstream developers so that
+they can be fixed in a future upstream release.
+ <p>
+While it's not your job to fix non-Debian specific bugs, you may freely
+do so if you're able. When you make such fixes, be sure to pass them on
+to the upstream maintainers as well. Debian users and developers will
+sometimes submit patches to fix upstream bugs — you should evaluate
+and forward these patches upstream.
<p>
If you need to modify the upstream sources in order to build a policy
compliant package, then you should propose a nice fix to the upstream
modify the sources of the next upstream version. Whatever changes you
need, always try not to fork from the upstream sources.
+
<sect id="rc-bugs">Managing release-critical bugs
<p>
Generally you should deal with bug reports on your packages as described in
<ref id="bug-handling">. However, there's a special category of bugs that
-you need to take care of -- the so-called release-critical bugs (RC bugs).
+you need to take care of — the so-called release-critical bugs (RC bugs).
All bug reports that have severity <em>critical</em>, <em>grave</em> or
<em>serious</em> are considered to have an impact on whether the package can
be released in the next stable release of Debian.
<sect id="mailing-lists">Mailing lists
<p>
-The mailing list server is at <tt>&lists-host;</tt>.
+Much of the conversation between Debian developers (and users) is managed
+through a wide array of mailing lists we host at
+<tt><url id="http://&lists-host;/" name="&lists-host;"></tt>.
+To find out more on how to subscribe or unsubscribe, how to post and how not
+to post, where to find old posts and how to search them, how to contact the
+list maintainers and see various other information about the mailing lists,
+please read <url id="&url-debian-lists;">. This section will only cover
+aspects of mailing lists that are of particular interest to developers.
+
+ <sect1 id="mailing-lists-rules">Basic rules for use
+ <p>
+When replying to messages on the mailing list, please do not send a
+carbon copy (<tt>CC</tt>) to the original poster unless they explicitly
+request to be copied. Anyone who posts to a mailing list should read
+it to see the responses.
+ <p>
+Cross-posting (sending the same message to multiple lists) is discouraged.
+As ever on the net, please trim down the quoting of articles you're
+replying to. In general, please adhere to the usual conventions for
+posting messages.
<p>
-Online archives of mailing lists are available at <url
-id="&url-lists-archives;">.
+Please read the <url name="code of conduct" id="&url-debian-lists;#codeofconduct">
+for more information.
<sect1 id="core-devel-mailing-lists">Core development mailing lists
<p>
</item>
</list>
<p>
-There are
-other mailing lists available for a variety of special topics; see
-<url id="&url-debian-lists-subscribe;"> for a list.
-
- <sect1 id="mailing-lists-subunsub">Subscribing and unsubscribing
- <p>
-To subscribe to or unsubscribe from any of the Debian mailing lists, email
-<tt>debian-<var>foo</var>-REQUEST@&lists-host;</tt>, where
-<tt>debian-<var>foo</var></tt> is the name of the list, with the word
-<tt>subscribe</tt> in the <em>Subject</em> to subscribe to the list or
-<tt>unsubscribe</tt> to unsubscribe.
- <p>
-If you prefer to use a web page to subscribe to multiple mailing lists,
-there's one at <url id="&url-debian-lists-subscribe;">.
- <p>
-You can download the current list of mailing lists and basic usage
-instructions from <url id="&url-debian-lists-txt;">
-or install the <package>doc-debian</package> package and have it
-locally in &file-mail-lists;.
-
- <sect1 id="mailing-lists-rules">Basic rules for use
- <p>
-When replying to messages on the mailing list, please do not send a
-carbon copy (<tt>CC</tt>) to the original poster unless they explicitly
-request to be copied. Anyone who posts to a mailing list should read
-it to see the responses.
- <p>
-Cross-posting (sending the same message to multiple lists) is discouraged.
-As ever on the net, please trim down the quoting of articles you're
-replying to. In general, please adhere to the usual conventions for
-posting messages. Please read the <url name="code of conduct"
-id="&url-debian-lists;"> for more information.
+There are other mailing lists available for a variety of special topics;
+see <url id="http://&lists-host;/"> for a list.
<sect1 id="mailing-lists-special">Special lists
<p>
about licenses, bugs, etc. or discussing the project with others where it
might be useful to have the discussion archived somewhere.
+ <sect1 id="mailing-lists-new">Requesting new development-related lists
+ <p>
+Before requesting a mailing list that relates to the development of a
+package (or a small group of related packages), please consider if using
+an alias (via a .forward-aliasname file on master.debian.org, which
+translates into a reasonably nice <var>you-aliasname@debian.org</var>
+address) or a self-managed mailing list on <qref id="alioth">Alioth</qref>
+is more appropriate.
+ <p>
+If you decide that a regular mailing list on lists.debian.org is really what
+you want, go ahead and fill in a request, following <url name="the HOWTO"
+id="&url-debian-lists-new;">.
<sect id="irc-channels">IRC channels
<p>
There are other additional channels dedicated to specific subjects.
<em>#debian-bugs</em> is used for coordinating bug squash parties.
<em>#debian-boot</em> is used to coordinate the work on the boot
-floppies (i.e. the installer). <em>#debian-doc</em> is
+floppies (i.e., the installer). <em>#debian-doc</em> is
occasionally used to talk about documentation, like the document you are
reading. Other channels are dedicated to an architecture or a set of
packages: <em>#debian-bsd</em>, <em>#debian-kde</em>, <em>#debian-jr</em>,
suggestions for the web site, etc.),
generally you'll report a bug against a ``pseudo-package''. See <ref
id="submit-bug"> for information on how to submit bugs.
+ <p>
+Some of the core servers are restricted, but the information from there
+is mirror to another server.
<sect1 id="servers-bugs">The bugs server
<p>
-<tt>bugs.debian.org</tt> is the canonical location for the Bug Tracking
-System (BTS). If you plan on doing some statistical analysis or
+<tt>&bugs-host;</tt> is the canonical location for the Bug Tracking
+System (BTS).
+ <p>
+It is restricted; a mirror is available on <tt>merkel</tt>.
+ <p>
+If you plan on doing some statistical analysis or
processing of Debian bugs, this would be the place to do it. Please
describe your plans on &email-debian-devel; before implementing
anything, however, to reduce unnecessary duplication of effort or
wasted processing time.
- <p>
-All Debian developers have accounts on <tt>bugs.debian.org</tt>.
<sect1 id="servers-ftp-master">The ftp-master server
<p>
archive (excluding the non-US packages). Generally, package uploads
go to this server; see <ref id="upload">.
<p>
+It is restricted; a mirror is available on <tt>merkel</tt>.
+ <p>
Problems with the Debian FTP archive generally need to be reported as
bugs against the <package>ftp.debian.org</package> pseudo-package or
an email to &email-ftpmaster;, but also see the procedures in
the lack of hyphen between "non" and "us" in the pseudo-package name
— that's for backwards compatibility). Remember to check whether or
not someone else has already reported the problem on the
-<url id="http://bugs.debian.org/nonus.debian.org" name="Bug Tracking System">.
+<url id="http://&bugs-host;/nonus.debian.org" name="Bug Tracking System">.
<sect1 id="servers-www">The www-master server
<p>
submit a bug against the pseudo-package,
<package>www.debian.org</package>. Remember to check whether or not someone
else has already reported the problem on the
-<url id="http://bugs.debian.org/www.debian.org" name="Bug Tracking System">.
+<url id="http://&bugs-host;/www.debian.org" name="Bug Tracking System">.
<sect1 id="servers-people">The people web server
<p>
&email-debian-admin;. Include the name of the requested CVS area,
the Debian account that should own the CVS root area, and why you need it.
+ <sect1 id="dchroot">chroots to different distributions
+ <p>
+On some machines, there are chroots to different distributions available.
+You can use them like
+
+<example>
+vore% dchroot unstable
+Executing shell in chroot: /org/vore.debian.org/chroots/user/unstable
+</example>
+
+In all chroots, the normal user home directories are available.
+You can find out which chroots are available via
+<tt>&url-devel-machines;</tt>.
+
<sect id="devel-db">The Developers Database
<p>
<prgn>finger yourlogin@db.debian.org</prgn> to see what it reports.
<p>
Developers can <url name="log into the database" id="&url-debian-db-login;">
-to change their debian-private list subscription, their personal
-information, to mark themselves on vacation, etc.
-For more information on keeping your entry the developer database
-up-to-date, please see <ref id="user-maint">.
+to change various information about themselves, such as:
+<list>
+ <item>forwarding address for your debian.org email
+ <item>subscription to debian-private
+ <item>whether you are on vacation
+ <item>personal information such as your address, country,
+ the latitude and longitude of the place where you live
+ for use in <url name="the world map of Debian developers"
+ id="&url-worldmap;">, phone and fax numbers, IRC nickname
+ and web page
+ <item>password and preferred shell on Debian Project machines
+</list>
+ <p>
+Most of the information is not accessible to the public, naturally.
+For more information please read the online documentation that you can find
+at <url id="&url-debian-db-doc;">.
<p>
One can also submit their SSH keys to be used for authorization on the
official Debian machines, and even add new *.debian.net DNS entries.
<p>
The &debian-formal; distribution consists of a lot of packages
(<file>.deb</file>'s, currently around &number-of-pkgs;) and a few
-additional files (such documentation and installation disk images).
+additional files (such as documentation and installation disk images).
<p>
Here is an example directory tree of a complete Debian archive:
<p>
(<file>source</file>) and a directory for each supported architecture
(<file>binary-i386</file>, <file>binary-m68k</file>, etc.).
<p>
-The <file>main</file> area contains additional directories which holds
+The <file>main</file> area contains additional directories which hold
the disk images and some essential pieces of documentation required
for installing the Debian distribution on a specific architecture
(<file>disks-i386</file>, <file>disks-m68k</file>, etc.).
- <sect1>Sections
+ <sect1 id="archive-sections">Sections
<p>
The <em>main</em> section of the Debian archive is what makes up the
<strong>official &debian-formal; distribution</strong>. The
package licenses of the packages in <em>non-free</em> and include as
many on the CD-ROMs as he's allowed to. (Since this varies greatly from
vendor to vendor, this job can't be done by the Debian developers.)
+ <p>
+Note also that the term "section" is also used to refer to categories
+which simplify the organization and browsing of available packages, e.g.
+<em>admin</em>, <em>net</em>, <em>utils</em> etc. Once upon a time, these
+sections (subsections, rather) existed in the form of subdirectories within
+the Debian archive. Nowadays, these exist only in the "Section" header
+fields of packages.
<sect1>Architectures
Linux 2.2 kernel supports even more architectures, including ARM and
UltraSPARC. Since Linux supports these platforms, Debian decided that
it should, too. Therefore, Debian has ports underway; in fact, we
-also have ports underway to non-Linux kernel. Aside from
+also have ports underway to non-Linux kernels. Aside from
<em>i386</em> (our name for Intel x86), there is <em>m68k</em>,
<em>alpha</em>, <em>powerpc</em>, <em>sparc</em>, <em>hurd-i386</em>,
<em>arm</em>, <em>ia64</em>, <em>hppa</em>, <em>s390</em>, <em>mips</em>,
support of five new architectures: <em>ia64</em>, <em>hppa</em>,
<em>s390</em>, <em>mips</em> and <em>mipsel</em>.
<p>
-Information for developers or uses about the specific ports are
+Information for developers and users about the specific ports are
available at the <url id="&url-debian-ports;" name="Debian Ports web
pages">.
-<!-- <sect1>Subsections
- <p>
-The sections <em>main</em>, <em>contrib</em>, and <em>non-free</em>
-are split into <em>subsections</em> to simplify the installation
-process and the maintenance of the archive. Subsections simply exist to
-simplify the organization and browsing of available packages. The
-<url id="&url-debian-policy;" name="Debian Policy Manual"> gives
-the authoritative list of subsections.
-
- <p>
-Note however that with the introduction of package pools (see the top-level
-<em>pool/</em> directory), the subsections in the form of subdirectories
-will eventually cease to exist. They will be kept in the packages' `Section'
-header fields, though. -->
<sect1>Packages
<p>
the package (maintainer, version, etc.).
- <sect1>Distribution directories
+ <sect1>Distributions
<p>
The directory system described in the previous chapter is itself
contained within <em>distribution directories</em>. Each
to make sure everything in this distribution is working properly, it is
sometimes literally unstable.
<p>
-<ref id="testing"> is generated automatically by taking
+The <qref id="testing">"testing"</qref> distribution is generated
+automatically by taking
packages from unstable if they satisfy certain criteria. Those
criteria should ensure a good quality for packages within testing.
The update to testing is launched each day after the
-new packages have been installed.
+new packages have been installed. See <ref id="testing">.
<p>
After a period of development, once the release manager deems fit, the
<em>testing</em> distribution is frozen, meaning that the policies
freeze period, since the <em>unstable</em> distribution remains in
place in parallel with <em>testing</em>.
- <sect2>Experimental
+ <sect2 id="testing">
+ <heading>More information about the testing distribution</heading>
+ <p>
+The scripts that update the <em>testing</em> distribution are run each
+day after the installation of the updated packages. They generate the
+<file>Packages</file> files for the <em>testing</em> distribution, but
+they do so in an intelligent manner trying to avoid any inconsistency
+and trying to use only non-buggy packages.
+ <p>
+The inclusion of a package from <em>unstable</em> is conditional on
+the following:
+<list>
+ <item>
+The package must have been available in <em>unstable</em> for several days;
+the precise number depends on the upload's urgency field. It
+is 10 days for low urgency, 5 days for medium urgency and 2 days for high
+urgency. Those delays may be doubled during a freeze;
+ <item>
+It must have less release-critical bugs than the version available
+in <em>testing</em>;
+ <item>
+It must be available on all architectures on which it has been
+previously built. <ref id="madison"> may be of interest to
+check that information;
+ <item>
+It must not break any dependency of a package that is already available
+in <em>testing</em>;
+ <item>
+The packages on which it depends must either be available in <em>testing</em>
+or they must be accepted into <em>testing</em> at the same time (and they will
+if they respect all the necessary criteria);
+</list>
+ <p>
+To find out whether a package is progressing into testing or not, see the
+testing script output on the <url name="web page of the testing distribution"
+id="&url-testing-maint;">, or use the program <prgn>grep-excuses</prgn>
+which is in the <package>devscripts</package> package. This utility can
+easily be used in a <manref name="crontab" section="5"> to keep one
+informed of the progression of their packages into <em>testing</em>.
+ <p>
+The <file>update_excuses</file> file does not always give the precise reason
+why the package is refused, one may have to find it on their own by looking
+for what would break with the inclusion of the package. The
+<url id="&url-testing-maint;" name="testing web page"> gives some more
+information about the usual problems which may be causing such troubles.
+ <p>
+Sometimes, some packages never enter <em>testing</em> because the set of
+inter-relationship is too complicated and cannot be sorted out
+by the scripts. In that case, the release manager must be
+contacted, and he will force the inclusion of the packages.
+ <p>
+In general, please refer to the <url name="testing web page"
+id="&url-testing-maint;"> for more information. It also includes
+answers to some of the frequently asked questions.
+
+
+ <sect2 id="experimental">Experimental
<p>
The <em>experimental</em> distribution is a special distribution.
It is not a full distribution in the same sense as `stable' and
warned. In short, all bets are off for the <em>experimental</em>
distribution.
<p>
+These are the <manref name="sources.list" section="5"> lines for
+<em>experimental</em>:
+<example>
+deb http://ftp.<var>xy</var>.debian.org/debian/ ../project/experimental main
+deb-src http://ftp.<var>xy</var>.debian.org/debian/ ../project/experimental main
+</example>
+ <p>
If there is a chance that the software could do grave damage to a system,
it is likely to be better to put it into <em>experimental</em>.
For instance, an experimental compressed file system should probably go
Whenever there is a new upstream version of a package that introduces new
features but breaks a lot of old ones, it should either not be uploaded, or
be uploaded to <em>experimental</em>. A new, beta, version of some software
-which uses completely different configuration can go into
+which uses a completely different configuration can go into
<em>experimental</em>, at the maintainer's discretion. If you are working
on an incompatible or complex upgrade situation, you can also use
<em>experimental</em> as a staging area, so that testers can get early
<p>
An alternative to <em>experimental</em> is to use your personal web space
on <tt>people.debian.org</tt>.
-
+ <p>
+Please consider to use the option <bb>-v</bb> to <bb>dpkg-buildpackage</bb>
+if uploading a package to unstable to get the bugs finally closed that were
+first fixed in experimental.
<sect1 id="codenames">Release code names
<p>
<p>
The various download archives and the web site have several mirrors
available in order to relieve our canonical servers from heavy load.
-In fact, some of the canonical servers aren't public, and instead a
-first tier of mirrors balances the load. That way, users always access
+In fact, some of the canonical servers aren't public — a first tier
+of mirrors balances the load instead. That way, users always access
the mirrors and get used to using them, which allows Debian to better
spread its bandwidth requirements over several servers and networks,
and basically makes users avoid hammering on one primary location.
<sect id="incoming-system">
<heading>The Incoming system
<p>
-The Incoming system is responsible of collecting updated packages and
+The Incoming system is responsible for collecting updated packages and
installing them in the Debian archive. It consists of a set of
directories and scripts that are installed both on <tt>&ftp-master-host;</tt>
and <tt>&non-us-host;</tt>.
<p>
Packages are uploaded by all the maintainers into a directory called
<file>unchecked</file>. This directory is scanned every 15 minutes by
-the <prgn>katie</prgn> script, which verifies the integrity of the uploaded packages and the cryptographic
-signatures. If the package is considered ready to be installed, it
+the <prgn>katie</prgn> script, which verifies the integrity of the uploaded
+packages and their cryptographic signatures.
+If the package is considered ready to be installed, it
is moved into the <file>accepted</file> directory. If this is the first upload of
the package, it is moved in the <file>new</file> directory, where it waits
for an approval of the ftpmasters. If the package contains files to be installed
made, a special script is called to ask all the primary mirrors to update
themselves.
<p>
-All debian developers have write access to the <file>unchecked</file>
+The archive maintenance software will also send the OpenPGP/GnuPG signed
+<file>.changes</file> file that you uploaded to the appropriate mailing
+lists. If a package is released with the <tt>Distribution:</tt> set to
+`stable', the announcement is sent to &email-debian-changes;.
+If a package is released with <tt>Distribution:</tt> set to `unstable'
+or `experimental', the announcement will be posted to
+&email-debian-devel-changes; instead.
+ <p>
+All Debian developers have write access to the <file>unchecked</file>
directory in order to upload their packages, they also have that access
to the <file>reject</file> directory in order to remove their bad uploads
or to move some files back in the <file>unchecked</file> directory. But
all the other directories are only writable by the ftpmasters, that is
why you can not remove an upload once it has been accepted.
- <sect1 id="delayed-incoming">Delayed incoming
- <p>
+ <sect1 id="delayed-incoming-broken">Delayed incoming
+ <p>
+<em>Note:</em> This description here is currently disabled, because
+ftp-master is restricted. Please see <ref id="delayed-incoming"> for
+the currently working way.
+ <p>
The <file>unchecked</file> directory has a special <file>DELAYED</file>
subdirectory. It is itself subdivided in nine directories
called <file>1-day</file> to <file>9-day</file>. Packages which are uploaded in
easily upload a package in one of the delayed directories:
<example>DELAY=5 dupload --to delayed <changes-file></example>
- <sect id="testing">
- <heading>The "testing" distribution</heading>
- <p>
-The scripts that update the <em>testing</em> distribution are run each day
-after the installation of the
-updated packages. They generate the <file>Packages</file> files for
-the <em>testing</em> distribution, but they do so in an intelligent manner
-trying to avoid any inconsistency and trying to use only
-non-buggy packages.
- <p>The inclusion of a package from <em>unstable</em> is conditional on the following:
-<list>
- <item>
-The package must have been available in <em>unstable</em> for several days;
-the precise number depends on the upload's urgency field. It
-is 10 days for low urgency, 5 days for medium urgency and 2 days for high
-urgency. Those delays may be doubled during a freeze;
- <item>
-It must have less release-critical bugs than the version available
-in <em>testing</em>;
- <item>
-It must be available on all architectures on which it has been
-previously built. <ref id="madison"> may be of interest to
-check that information;
- <item>
-It must not break any dependency of a package that is already available
-in <em>testing</em>;
- <item>
-The packages on which it depends must either be available in <em>testing</em>
-or they must be accepted into <em>testing</em> at the same time (and they will
-if they respect themselves all the criteria);
-</list>
- <p>
-To find out whether a package is progressing into testing or not, see the
-testing script output on the <url name="web page of the testing distribution"
-id="&url-testing-maint;">, or use the program <prgn>grep-excuses</prgn>
-which is in the <package>devscripts</package> package. This utility can
-easily be used in a <manref name="crontab" section="5"> to keep one
-informed of the progression of their packages into <em>testing</em>.
- <p>
-The <file>update_excuses</file> file does not always give the precise reason
-why the package is refused, one may have to find it on their own by looking
-what would break with the inclusion of the package. The <url
-id="&url-testing-maint;" name="testing web page"> gives some more information
-about the usual problems which may be causing such troubles.
- <p>
-Sometimes, some packages never enter <em>testing</em> because the set of
-inter-relationship is too complicated and can not be sorted out
-by the scripts. In that case, the release manager must be
-contacted, and he will force the inclusion of the packages.
- <p>
-In general, please refer to the <url name="testing web page"
-id="&url-testing-maint;"> for more information. It also includes
-answers to some of the frequently asked questions.
+
<sect id="pkg-info">Package information
<p>
which provides information, including the package description,
the dependencies and package download links.
<p>
-The bug tracking system track bugs for each package. You can
-view the bugs of a given package at the URL
+The bug tracking system tracks bugs for each package.
+You can view the bugs of a given package at the URL
<tt>http://&bugs-host;/<var>package-name</var></tt>.
<sect1 id="madison">The <prgn>madison</prgn> utility
<sect id="pkg-tracking-system">The Package Tracking System
<p>
-The Package Tracking System (PTS) is basically a tool to track by mail
-the activity of a source package. You just have to subscribe
-to a source package to start getting the mails related to it.
-You get the same mails as the maintainer. Each mail
-sent through the PTS is classified and associated to one of
-the keyword listed below. This will let you select the mails that
+The Package Tracking System (PTS) is an email-based tool to track
+the activity of a source package. This really means that you can
+get the same emails that the package maintainer gets, simply by
+subscribing to the package in the PTS.
+ <p>
+Each email sent through the PTS is classified under one of
+the keywords listed below. This will let you select the mails that
you want to receive.
<p>
By default you will get:
<tag><tt>bts-control</tt>
<item>
-The control mails notifying a status change in one of the bugs.
+The email notifications from <email>control@bugs.debian.org</email>
+about bug report status changes.
<tag><tt>upload-source</tt>
<item>
-The
confirmation mail from <prgn>katie</prgn> when an uploaded source
+The
email notification from <prgn>katie</prgn> when an uploaded source
package is accepted.
<tag><tt>katie-other</tt>
<item>
-Other warning and error mails from <prgn>katie</prgn> (like the
-override disparity for the section or priority field).
+Other warning and error emails from <prgn>katie</prgn> (such as an
+override disparity for the section and/or the priority field).
<tag><tt>default</tt>
<item>
-Any non-automatic mail sent to the PTS by people who wanted to
-contact the subscribers of the package.
+Any non-automatic email sent to the PTS by people who wanted to
+contact the subscribers of the package. This can be done by sending mail
+to <tt><var>sourcepackage</var>@&pts-host;</tt>. In order to prevent spam,
+all messages sent to these addresses must contain the <tt>X-PTS-Approved</tt>
+header with a non-empty value.
<tag><tt>summary</tt>
<item>
-In the future, you may receive regular summary mails to keep you
-informed of the package's status (bug statistics, porting overview,
-progression in <em>testing</em>, ...).
+(This is a planned expansion.)
+The regular summary emails about the package's status (bug statistics,
+porting overview, progression in <em>testing</em>, ...).
</taglist>
+
<p>
-You can also decide to receive some more information:
+You can also decide to receive additional information:
<taglist>
<tag><tt>upload-binary</tt>
<item>
-The confirmation mail from <prgn>katie</prgn> when an uploaded binary
-package is accepted (to check that your package is recompiled for all
-architectures).
+The email notification from <prgn>katie</prgn> when an uploaded binary
+package is accepted. In other words, whenever a build daemon or a porter
+uploads your package for another architecture, you can get an email to
+track how your package gets recompiled for all architectures.
<tag><tt>cvs</tt>
<item>
-CVS commits if the maintainer has setup a system to forward commit
-notification to the PTS.
+CVS commit notifications, if the package has a CVS repository and the
+maintainer has set up forwarding commit notifications to the PTS.
<tag><tt>ddtp</tt>
<item>
<taglist>
-<tag><tt>subscribe <srcpackage> [<email>]</tt>
+<tag><tt>subscribe <sourcepackage> [<email>]</tt>
<item>
Subscribes <var>email</var> to communications related to the source package
- <var>srcpackage</var>. Sender address is used if the second argument is
- not present. If <var>srcpackage</var> is not a valid source package,
+ <var>sourcepackage</var>. Sender address is used if the second argument is
+ not present. If <var>sourcepackage</var> is not a valid source package,
you'll get a warning. However if it's a valid binary package, the PTS
will subscribe you to the corresponding source package.
-<tag><tt>unsubscribe <srcpackage> [<email>]</tt>
+<tag><tt>unsubscribe <sourcepackage> [<email>]</tt>
<item>
- Removes a previous subscription to the source package <var>srcpackage</var>
+ Removes a previous subscription to the source package <var>sourcepackage</var>
using the specified email address or the sender address if the second
argument is left out.
<tag><tt>keyword [<email>]</tt>
<item>
- Tells you the keywords that you are accepting. Each mail sent through
- the Package Tracking System is associated to a keyword and you receive
- only the mails associated to keywords that you are accepting. Here is
- the list of available keywords:
+ Tells you the keywords that you are accepting.
+ For an explanation of keywords, <qref id="pkg-tracking-system">see
+ above</qref>. Here's a quick summary:
<list>
<item><tt>bts</tt>: mails coming from the Debian Bug Tracking System
- <item><tt>bts-control</tt>: reply to mails sent to
- <email>control@bugs.debian.org</email>
+ <item><tt>bts-control</tt>: reply to mails sent to &email-bts-control;
<item><tt>summary</tt>: automatic summary mails about the state of a package
<item><tt>cvs</tt>: notification of CVS commits
<item><tt>ddtp</tt>: translations of descriptions and debconf templates
<item><tt>default</tt>: all the other mails (those which aren't "automatic")
</list>
-<tag><tt>keyword <srcpackage> [<email>]</tt>
+<tag><tt>keyword <sourcepackage> [<email>]</tt>
<item>
- Same as previous item but for the given source package since
+ Same as the previous item but for the given source package, since
you may select a different set of keywords for each source package.
<tag><tt>keyword [<email>] {+|-|=} <list of keywords></tt>
<item>
- Accept (+) or refuse (-) mails associated to the given keyword(s).
+ Accept (+) or refuse (-) mails classified under the given keyword(s).
Define the list (=) of accepted keywords.
-<tag><tt>keyword <srcpackage> [<email>] {+|-|=} <list of keywords></tt>
+<tag><tt>keyword <sourcepackage> [<email>] {+|-|=} <list of keywords></tt>
<item>
Same as previous item but overrides the keywords list for the
indicated source package.
<sect1 id="pts-mail-filtering">Filtering PTS mails
<p>
Once you are subscribed to a package, you will get the mails sent to
-<tt><var>srcpackage</var>@packages.qa.debian.org</tt>. Those mails
+<tt><var>sourcepackage</var>@packages.qa.debian.org</tt>. Those mails
have special headers appended to let you filter them in a special
-mailbox with <prgn>procmail</prgn>. The added headers are
+mailbox (e.g. with <prgn>procmail</prgn>). The added headers are
<tt>X-Loop</tt>, <tt>X-PTS-Package</tt>, <tt>X-PTS-Keyword</tt> and
<tt>X-Unsubscribe</tt>.
<p>
<p>
If you use a publicly accessible CVS repository for maintaining
your Debian package you may want to forward the commit notification
-to the PTS so that the subscribers (possible co-maintainers) can
+to the PTS so that the subscribers (and possible co-maintainers) can
closely follow the package's evolution.
<p>
-It's very easy to setup. Once your CVS repository generates commit
-notifications, you just have to make sure it sends a copy of those mails
-to <tt><var>srcpackage</var>_cvs@&pts-host;</tt>. Only people who
-accepts the <em>cvs</em> keyword will receive the notifications.
+Once you set up the CVS repository to generate commit notifications,
+you just have to make sure it sends a copy of those mails
+to <tt><var>sourcepackage</var>_cvs@&pts-host;</tt>. Only the people
+who accept the <em>cvs</em> keyword will receive these notifications.
+
+ <sect1 id="pts-web">The PTS web interface
+ <p>
+The PTS has a web interface at <url id="http://&pts-host;/"> that puts
+together a lot of information about each source package. It features many useful
+links (BTS, QA stats, contact information, DDTP translation status,
+buildd logs) and gathers much more information from various places
+(30 latest changelog entries, testing status, ...). It's a very useful
+tool if you want to know what's going on with a specific source
+package. Furthermore there's a form that allows easy subscription to
+the PTS via email.
+ <p>
+You can jump directly to the web page concerning a specific source package
+with a URL like <tt>http://&pts-host;/<var>sourcepackage</var></tt>.
+ <p>
+This web interface has been designed like a portal for the development of
+packages: you can add custom content on your packages' pages. You can
+add "static information" (news items that are meant to stay available
+indefinitely) and news items in the "latest news" section.
+ <p>
+Static news items can be used to indicate:
+<list>
+<item>the availability of a project hosted on <qref id="alioth">Alioth</qref> for co-maintaining the package
+<item>a link to the upstream web site
+<item>a link to the upstream bug tracker
+<item>the existence of an IRC channel dedicated to the software
+<item>any other available resource that could be useful in the maintenance of the package
+</list>
+Usual news items may be used to announce that:
+<list>
+<item>beta packages are available for testing
+<item>final packages are expected for next week
+<item>the packaging is about to be redone from scratch
+<item>backports are available
+<item>the maintainer is on vacation (if they wish to publish this information)
+<item>a NMU is being worked on
+<item>something important will affect the package
+</list>
+ <p>
+Both kinds of news are generated in a similar manner: you just have to send
+an email either to <email>pts-static-news@qa.debian.org</email> or to
+<email>pts-news@qa.debian.org</email>. The mail should indicate which
+package is concerned by having the name of the source package in a
+<tt>X-PTS-Package</tt> mail header or in a <tt>Package</tt> pseudo-header (like the
+BTS reports). If a URL is available in the <tt>X-PTS-Url</tt> mail header or in
+the <tt>Url</tt> pseudo-header, then the result is a link to that URL instead
+of a complete news item.
+ <p>
+Here are a few examples of valid mails used to generate news items in
+the PTS. The first one adds a link to the cvsweb interface of debian-cd
+in the "Static information" section:
+<example>
+From: Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org>
+To: pts-static-news@qa.debian.org
+Subject: Browse debian-cd CVS repository with cvsweb
+
+Package: debian-cd
+Url: http://cvs.debian.org/debian-cd/
+</example>
+ <p>
+The second one is an announcement sent to a mailing list which is also sent
+to the PTS so that it is published on the PTS web page of the package. Note the
+use of the BCC field to avoid answers sent to the PTS by mistake.
+<example>
+From: Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org>
+To: debian-gtk-gnome@lists.debian.org
+Bcc: pts-news@qa.debian.org
+Subject: Galeon 2.0 backported for woody
+X-PTS-Package: galeon
+
+Hello gnomers!
+
+I'm glad to announce that galeon has been backported for woody. You'll find
+everything here:
+...
+</example>
+ <p>
+Think twice before adding a news item to the PTS because you won't be able
+to remove it later and you wan't be able to edit it either. The only thing
+that you can do is send a second news item that will deprecate the
+information contained in the previous one.
<sect id="ddpo">Developer's packages overview
<p>
you don't forget any open bug, and so that you don't forget which
packages are under your responsibility.
+ <sect id="alioth">Debian *Forge: Alioth
+ <p>
+Alioth is a fairly new Debian service, based on a slightly modified version
+of the GForge software (which evolved from SourceForge). This software
+offers developers access to easy-to-use tools such as bug trackers, patch
+manager, project/task managers, file hosting services, mailing lists, CVS
+repositories etc. All these tools are managed via a web interface.
+ <p>
+It is intended to provide facilities to free software projects backed or led
+by Debian, facilitate contributions from external developers to projects
+started by Debian, and help projects whose goals are the promotion of Debian
+or its derivatives.
+ <p>
+For more information please visit <url id="&url-alioth;">.
+
<chapt id="pkgs">Managing Packages
<p>
This chapter contains information related to creating, uploading,
maintaining, and porting packages.
- <sect id="upload">Package uploads
- <sect1>New packages
+ <sect id="newpackage">New packages
<p>
If you want to create a new package for the Debian distribution, you
should first check the <url id="&url-wnpp;" name="Work-Needing and
better feel of what is going on, and what is new, in the project.
</list>
- <sect1 id="changelog-entries">
- <heading>Adding an entry to <file>debian/changelog</file></heading>
+
+ <sect id="changelog-entries">Recording changes in the package
<p>
Changes that you make to the package need to be recorded in the
<file>debian/changelog</file>. These changes should provide a concise
<p>
The <file>debian/changelog</file> file conforms to a certain structure,
with a number of different fields. One field of note, the
-<em>distribution</em>, is described in <ref id="upload-dist">. More
+<em>distribution</em>, is described in <ref id="distribution">. More
information about the structure of this file can be found in
the Debian Policy section titled "<file>debian/changelog</file>".
<p>
the package is installed into the archive. See <ref
id="upload-bugfix">.
<p>
-It is conventional that the changelog entry notating of a package that
+It is conventional that the changelog entry of a package that
contains a new upstream version of the software looks like this:
<example>
* new upstream version
There are tools to help you create entries and finalize the
<file>changelog</file> for release — see <ref id="devscripts">
and <ref id="dpkg-dev-el">.
+ <p>
+See also <ref id="bpp-debian-changelog">.
-
- <sect1 id="upload-checking">Checking the package prior to upload
- <p>
+ <sect id="sanitycheck">Testing the package
+ <p>
Before you upload your package, you should do basic testing on it. At
a minimum, you should try the following activities (you'll need to
have an older version of the same Debian package around):
<p>
For more information on <prgn>lintian</prgn>, see <ref id="lintian">.
<item>
+Optionally run <ref id="debdiff"> to analyze changes from an older version,
+if one exists.
+ <item>
Downgrade the package to the previous version (if one exists) — this
tests the <file>postrm</file> and <file>prerm</file> scripts.
<item>
</list>
- <sect1>Generating the changes file
- <p>
-When a package is uploaded to the Debian FTP archive, it must be
-accompanied by a <file>.changes</file> file, which gives directions to the
-archive maintainers for its handling. This is usually generated by
-<prgn>dpkg-genchanges</prgn> during the normal package build process.
- <p>
-The changes file is a control file with the following fields:
- <p>
-&control-file-fields;
- <p>
-All of these fields are mandatory for a Debian upload. See the list
-of control fields in the <url id="&url-debian-policy;" name="Debian
-Policy Manual"> for the contents of these fields. You can close bugs
-automatically using the <tt>Description</tt> field, see <ref
-id="upload-bugfix">.
-
-
- <sect2>The original source tarball
- <p>
+ <sect id="sourcelayout">Layout of the source package
+ <p>
+There are two types of Debian source packages:
+ <list>
+ <item>the so-called <em>native</em> packages, where there is no
+ distinction between the original sources and the patches
+ applied for Debian
+ <item>the (more common) packages where there's an original source
+ tarball file accompanied by another file that contains the
+ patches applied for Debian
+ </list>
+ <p>
+For the native packages, the source package includes a Debian source control
+file (<tt>.dsc</tt>) and the source tarball (<tt>.tar.gz</tt>). A source
+package of a non-native package includes a Debian source control file, the
+original source tarball (<tt>.orig.tar.gz</tt>) and the Debian patches
+(<tt>.diff.gz</tt>).
+ <p>
+Whether a package is native or not is determined when it is built by
+<manref name="dpkg-buildpackage" section="1">. The rest of this section
+relates only to non-native packages.
+ <p>
The first time a version is uploaded which corresponds to a particular
upstream version, the original source tar file should be uploaded and
included in the <file>.changes</file> file. Subsequently, this very same
tar file should be used to build the new diffs and <file>.dsc</file>
files, and will not need to be re-uploaded.
+ <p>
By default, <prgn>dpkg-genchanges</prgn> and
<prgn>dpkg-buildpackage</prgn> will include the original source tar
file if and only if the Debian revision part of the source version
number is 0 or 1, indicating a new upstream version. This behavior
may be modified by using <tt>-sa</tt> to always include it or
<tt>-sd</tt> to always leave it out.
+ <p>
If no original source is included in the upload, the original
source tar-file used by <prgn>dpkg-source</prgn> when constructing the
<file>.dsc</file> file and diff to be uploaded <em>must</em> be
byte-for-byte identical with the one already in the archive.
- <sect2 id="upload-dist">Picking a distribution
- <p>
-The <tt>Distribution</tt> field, which originates from the first line of
-the <file>debian/changelog</file> file, indicates which distribution the
-package is intended for.
- <p>
+ <sect id="distribution">Picking a distribution
+ <p>
+Each upload needs to specify which distribution the package is intended
+for. The package build process extracts this information from the first
+line of the <file>debian/changelog</file> file and places it in the
+<tt>Distribution</tt> field of the <tt>.changes</tt> file.
+ <p>
There are several possible values for this field: `stable', `unstable',
-`testing-proposed-updates' and `experimental'. Normally, packages are uploaded into
-<em>unstable</em>. Actually, there are two other possible distributions:
-`stable-security' and `testing-security'. However they are used by the
-security team; do not upload there without their agreement.
- <p>
-It is technically possible to upload a package into several distributions
-at the same time but it usually doesn't make sense to use that feature
-because the dependencies of the package may vary with the distribution.
-In particular, it never makes sense to combine the <em>experimental</em>
-distribution with anything else.
-
+`testing-proposed-updates' and `experimental'. Normally, packages are
+uploaded into <em>unstable</em>.
+ <p>
+Actually, there are two other possible distributions: `stable-security' and
+`testing-security', but read <ref id="bug-security"> for more information on
+those.
+ <p>
+It is not possible to upload a package into several distributions
+at the same time.
- <sect3 id="upload-stable">Uploading to <em>stable</em>
- <p>
+ <sect1 id="upload-stable">
+ <heading>Special case: uploads to the <em>stable</em> distribution</heading>
+ <p>
Uploading to <em>stable</em> means that the package will be placed into the
<file>stable-proposed-updates</file> directory of the Debian archive for further
testing before it is actually included in <em>stable</em>.
+ <p>
Extra care should be taken when uploading to <em>stable</em>. Basically, a
package should only be uploaded to stable if one of the following happens:
<list>
- <item>a security problem (e.g. a Debian security advisory)
<item>a truly critical functionality problem
<item>the package becomes uninstallable
<item>a released architecture lacks the package
</list>
- <p>
-It is discouraged to change anything else in the package that isn't
-important, because even trivial fixes can cause bugs later on. Uploading
-new upstream versions to fix security problems is deprecated; applying the
-specific patch from the new upstream version to the old one ("back-porting"
-the patch) is the right thing to do in most cases.
- <p>
+<p>
+In the past, uploads to <em>stable</em> 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 <file>proposed-updates</file> archive when the advisory is
+released. See <ref id="bug-security"> for detailed information on
+handling security problems.
+ <p>
+Changing anything else in the package that isn't important is discouraged,
+because even trivial fixes can cause bugs later on.
+ <p>
Packages uploaded to <em>stable</em> need to be compiled on systems running
<em>stable</em>, so that their dependencies are limited to the libraries
(and other packages) available in <em>stable</em>; for example, a package
exists in unstable will be rejected. Making changes to dependencies of other
packages (by messing with <tt>Provides</tt> or shlibs files), possibly making
those other packages uninstallable, is strongly discouraged.
+ <p>
The Release Team (which can be reached at &email-debian-release;) will
regularly evaluate the uploads in <em>stable-proposed-updates</em> and decide if
your package can be included in <em>stable</em>. Please be clear (and
verbose, if necessary) in your changelog entries for uploads to
<em>stable</em>, because otherwise the package won't be considered for
inclusion.
+ <p>
+It's best practice to speak with the stable release manager <em>before</em>
+uploading to <em>stable</em>/<em>stable-proposed-updates</em>, so that the
+uploaded package fits the needs of the next point release.
- <sect3 id="upload-t-p-u">Uploading to <em>testing-proposed-updates</em>
- <p>
+ <sect1 id="upload-t-p-u">
+ <heading>Special case: uploads to <em>testing-proposed-updates</em></heading>
+ <p>
The testing distribution is fed with packages from unstable according to the rules
explained in <ref id="testing">. However, the release manager may stop the testing
scripts when he wants to freeze the distribution. In that case, you may want to
upload to <em>testing-proposed-updates</em> to provide fixed packages during the freeze.
+ <p>
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 manager's eyes, you should read the instructions that he regularly
gives on &email-debian-devel-announce;.
+ <p>
You should not upload to <em>testing-proposed-updates</em> when you can update your
packages through <em>unstable</em>. If you can't (for example because you have a
newer development version in unstable), you may use it but it is recommended to ask
the authorization of the release manager before.
- <sect1 id="uploading">Uploading a package
- <sect2 id="upload-ftp-master">Uploading to <tt>ftp-master</tt>
+ <sect id="upload">Uploading a package
+
+ <sect1 id="upload-ftp-master">Uploading to <tt>ftp-master</tt>
+ <p>
+To upload a package, you should upload the files (including the signed
+changes and dsc-file) with anonymous ftp to
+<ftpsite>&ftp-master-host;</ftpsite> in the directory &upload-queue;.
+To get the files processed there, they need to be signed with a key in the
+debian keyring.
<p>
-To upload a package, you need a personal account on
-<ftpsite>&ftp-master-host;</ftpsite>, which you should have as an
-official maintainer. If you use <prgn>scp</prgn> or <prgn>rsync</prgn>
-to transfer the files, place them into &us-upload-dir;;
-if you use anonymous FTP to upload, place them into
-&upload-queue;. Please note that you should transfer
+Please note that you should transfer
the changes file last. Otherwise, your upload may be rejected because the
archive maintenance software will parse the changes file and see that not
-all files have been uploaded. If you don't want to bother with transferring
-the changes file last, you can simply copy your files to a temporary
-directory on <tt>ftp-master</tt> and then move them to
-&us-upload-dir;.
- <p>
+all files have been uploaded.
+ <p>
<em>Note:</em> Do not upload to <tt>ftp-master</tt> cryptographic
packages which belong to <em>contrib</em> or <em>non-free</em>. Uploads of
such software should go to <tt>non-us</tt> (see <ref
<tt>ftp-master</tt>; depending on the case they may still be uploaded to
<file>non-US/non-free</file> (it's in non-free because of distribution issues
and not because of the license of the software). If you can't upload it to
-<tt>ftp-master</tt>, then neither can you upload it to the overseas upload
-queues on <tt>chiark</tt> or <tt>erlangen</tt>. If you are not sure
+<tt>ftp-master</tt>, then neither can you upload it to backup
+queues that finally also end up on <tt>ftp-master</tt>. If you are not sure
whether U.S. patent controls or cryptographic controls apply to your
package, post a message to &email-debian-devel; and ask.
<p>
You may also find the Debian packages <ref id="dupload"> or
<ref id="dput"> useful
-when uploading packages. These handy programs help automate the
+when uploading packages. These handy programs help automate the
process of uploading packages into Debian.
<p>
-After uploading your package, you can check how the archive
-maintenance software will process it by running <prgn>dinstall</prgn>
-on your changes file: <example>dinstall -n foo.changes</example>.
-Note that <prgn>dput</prgn> can do this for you automatically.
+For removing packages, please see the README file in that ftp directory,
+and the Debian package <ref id="dcut">.
- <sect2 id="upload-non-us">Uploading to <tt>non-US</tt>
+ <sect1 id="upload-non-us">Uploading to <tt>non-US</tt>
<p>
-As discussed above, export controlled software should not be uploaded
-to <tt>ftp-master</tt>. Instead, upload the package to
-<ftpsite>non-us.debian.org</ftpsite>, placing the files in
-&non-us-upload-dir; (again, both <ref id="dupload"> and <ref
-id="dput"> can do this for you if invoked properly). By default,
-you can use the same account/password that works on
-<tt>ftp-master</tt>. If you use anonymous FTP to upload, place the
-files into &upload-queue;.
+<em>Note:</em> non-us is currently not processed any more.
<p>
-You can check your upload the same way it's done on <tt>ftp-master</tt>,
-with:
-<example>dinstall -n foo.changes</example>
+As discussed above, export controlled software should not be uploaded
+to <tt>ftp-master</tt>. Instead, upload the package with anonymous FTP
+to <ftpsite>non-us.debian.org</ftpsite>, placing the files in
+&upload-queue; (again, both <ref id="dupload"> and <ref
+id="dput"> can do this for you if invoked properly).
<p>
Note that U.S. residents or citizens are subject to restrictions on
export of cryptographic software. As of this writing, U.S. citizens
residents consult a lawyer before doing uploads to non-US.
- <sect2>Uploads via <tt>chiark</tt>
+ <sect1 id="delayed-incoming">Delayed uploads
<p>
-If you have a slow network connection to <tt>ftp-master</tt>, there are
-alternatives. One is to upload files to <file>Incoming</file> via a
-upload queue in Europe on <tt>chiark</tt>. For details connect to
-<url id="&url-chiark-readme;">.
+Delayed uploads are done for the moment via the delayed queue at
+gluck. The upload-directory is
+<ftpsite>gluck:~tfheen/DELAYED/[012345678]-day</ftpsite>.
+0-day is uploaded approximately one hour before dinstall runs.
<p>
-<em>Note:</em> Do not upload packages containing software that is
-export-controlled by the United States government to the queue on
-<tt>chiark</tt>. Since this upload queue goes to <tt>ftp-master</tt>, the
-prescription found in <ref id="upload-ftp-master"> applies here as well.
+With a fairly recent dput, this section
+<example>
+[tfheen_delayed]
+method = scp
+fqdn = gluck.debian.org
+incoming = ~tfheen
+</example>
+in ~/.dput.cf should work fine for uploading to the DELAYED queue.
<p>
-The program <prgn>dupload</prgn> comes with support for uploading to
-<tt>chiark</tt>; please refer to the documentation that comes with the
-program for details.
-
+<em>Note:</em>
+Since this upload queue goes to <tt>ftp-master</tt>, the
+prescription found in <ref id="upload-ftp-master"> applies here as well.
- <sect2>Uploads via <tt>erlangen</tt>
- <p>
-Another upload queue is available in Germany: just upload the files
-via anonymous FTP to <url id="&url-upload-erlangen;">.
+ <sect1>Security uploads
<p>
-The upload must be a complete Debian upload, as you would put it into
-<tt>ftp-master</tt>'s <file>Incoming</file>, i.e., a <file>.changes</file> files
-along with the other files mentioned in the <file>.changes</file>. The
-queue daemon also checks that the <file>.changes</file> is correctly
-signed with GnuPG or OpenPGP by a Debian developer, so that no bogus files can find
-their way to <tt>ftp-master</tt> via this queue. Please also make sure that
-the <tt>Maintainer</tt> field in the <file>.changes</file> contains
-<em>your</em> e-mail address. The address found there is used for all
-replies, just as on <tt>ftp-master</tt>.
- <p>
-There's no need to move your files into a second directory after the
-upload, as on <tt>chiark</tt>. And, in any case, you should get a
-mail reply from the queue daemon explaining what happened to your
-upload. Hopefully it should have been moved to <tt>ftp-master</tt>, but in
-case of errors you're notified, too.
+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 <ref id="bug-security">.
+
+ <sect1>Other upload queues
<p>
-<em>Note:</em> Do not upload packages containing software that is
-export-controlled by the United States government to the queue on
-<tt>erlangen</tt>. Since this upload queue goes to <tt>ftp-master</tt>, the
-prescription found in <ref id="upload-ftp-master"> applies here as well.
+The scp queues on ftp-master, non-us and security are mostly unuseable
+due to the login restrictions on those hosts.
<p>
-The program <prgn>dupload</prgn> comes with support for uploading to
-<tt>erlangen</tt>; please refer to the documentation that comes with
-the program for details.
-
-
- <sect2>Other upload queues
+The anonymous queues on ftp.uni-erlangen.de and ftp.uk.debian.org are
+currently down. Work is underway to resurrect those.
<p>
-Another upload queue is available which is based in the US, and is a
-good backup when there are problems reaching <tt>ftp-master</tt>. You can
-upload files, just as in <tt>erlangen</tt>, to <url
-id="&url-upload-samosa;">.
+The queues on master.debian.org, samosa.debian.org, master.debian.or.jp
+and 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.
<p>
-An upload queue is available in Japan: just upload the files via
-anonymous FTP to <url id="&url-upload-jp;">.
-
-
-
- <sect1 id="upload-announce">Announcing package uploads
- <p>
-When a package is uploaded, an announcement should be posted to one of
-the ``debian-changes'' lists. This is now done automatically by the archive
-maintenance software when it runs (usually once a day). You just need to use
-a recent <package>dpkg-dev</package> (>= 1.4.1.2). The mail generated by
-the archive maintenance software will contain the OpenPGP/GnuPG signed
-<file>.changes</file> files that you uploaded with your package.
-Previously, <prgn>dupload</prgn> used to send those announcements, so
-please make sure that you configured your <prgn>dupload</prgn> not to
-send those announcements (check its documentation and look for
-``dinstall_runs'').
- <p>
-If a package is released with the <tt>Distribution:</tt> set to
-`stable', the announcement is sent to &email-debian-changes;. If a
-package is released with <tt>Distribution:</tt> set to `unstable',
-or `experimental', the announcement will be
-posted to &email-debian-devel-changes; instead.
+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.
<sect1 id="upload-notification">
<heading>Notification that a new package has been installed</heading>
The installation notification also includes information on what
section the package was inserted into. If there is a disparity, you
will receive a separate email notifying you of that. Read on below.
+ <p>
+Note also that if you upload via queues, the queue daemon software will
+also send you a notification by email.
- <sect2 id="override-file">The override file
+ <sect id="override-file">Specifying the package section, subsection and priority
+ <p>
The <file>debian/control</file> file's <tt>Section</tt> and
<tt>Priority</tt> fields do not actually specify where the file will
be placed in the archive, nor its priority. In order to retain the
overall integrity of the archive, it is the archive maintainers who
have control over these fields. The values in the
<file>debian/control</file> file are actually just hints.
+ <p>
The archive maintainers keep track of the canonical sections and
priorities for packages in the <em>override file</em>. If there is a
disparity between the <em>override file</em> and the package's fields
archive. You can either correct your <file>debian/control</file> file
for your next upload, or else you may wish to make a change in the
<em>override file</em>.
+ <p>
To alter the actual section that a package is put in, you need to
first make sure that the <file>debian/control</file> in your package
is accurate. Next, send an email &email-override; or submit a bug
against <package>ftp.debian.org</package> 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.
+ <p>
For more information about <em>override files</em>, see <manref
-name="dpkg-scanpackages" section="8">, &file-bts-mailing;, and
-&file-bts-info;.
-
+name="dpkg-scanpackages" section="8"> and
+<url id="&url-bts-devel;#maintincorrect">.
+ <p>
+Note that the <tt>Section</tt> field describes both the section as
+well as the subsection, which are described in <ref
+id="archive-sections">. If the section is "main", it should be
+omitted. The list of allowable subsections can be found in <url
+id="&url-debian-policy;ch-archive.html#s-subsections">.
- <sect id="nmu">Non-Maintainer Uploads (NMUs)
- <p>
-Under certain circumstances it is necessary for someone other than the
-official package maintainer to make a release of a package. This is
-called a non-maintainer upload, or NMU.
- <p>
-Debian porters, who compile packages for different architectures,
-occasionally do binary-only NMUs as part of their porting activity
-(see <ref id="porting">). Another reason why NMUs are done is when a
-Debian developers needs to fix another developers' packages in order to
-address serious security problems or crippling bugs, especially during
-the freeze, or when the package maintainer is unable to release a fix
-in a timely fashion.
- <p>
-This chapter contains information providing guidelines for when and
-how NMUs should be done. A fundamental distinction is made between
-source and binary-only NMUs, which is explained in the next section.
-
- <sect1 id="nmu-terms">Terminology
- <p>
-There are two new terms used throughout this section: ``binary-only NMU''
-and ``source NMU''. These terms are used with specific technical
-meaning 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
-<em>non-maintainer</em> upload.
+ <sect id="bug-handling">Handling bugs
<p>
-A source NMU is an upload of a package by a developer who is not the
-official maintainer, for the purposes of fixing a bug in the package.
-Source NMUs always involves changes to the source (even if it is just
-a change to <file>debian/changelog</file>). This can be either a
-change to the upstream source, or a change to the Debian bits of the
-source. Note, however, that source NMUs may also include
-architecture-dependent packages, as well as an updated Debian diff.
+Every developer has to be able to work with the Debian <url name="bug
+tracking system" id="&url-bts;">. This includes knowing how to file bug
+reports properly (see <ref id="submit-bug">), how to update them and
+reorder them, and how to process and close them.
<p>
-A binary-only NMU is a recompilation and upload of a binary package
-for a given architecture. As such, it is usually part of a porting
-effort. A binary-only NMU is a non-maintainer uploaded binary version
-of a package, with no source changes required. There are many cases
-where porters must fix problems in the source in order to get them to
-compile for their target architecture; that would be considered a
-source NMU rather than a binary-only NMU. As you can see, we don't
-distinguish in terminology between porter NMUs and non-porter NMUs.
+The bug tracking system's features interesting to developers are described
+in the <url id="&url-bts-devel;" name="BTS documentation for developers">.
+This includes closing bugs, sending followup messages, assigning severities
+and tags, marking bugs as forwarded and other issues.
<p>
-Both classes of NMUs, source and binary-only, can be lumped by the
-term ``NMU''. However, this often leads to confusion, since most
-people think ``source NMU'' when they think ``NMU''. So it's best to
-be careful. In this chapter, if we use the unqualified term ``NMU'',
-we refer to any type of non-maintainer upload NMUs, whether source and
-binary, or binary-only.
-
+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 in this server are described in the
+<url id="&url-bts-control;" name="BTS control server documentation">.
- <sect1 id="nmu-who">Who can do an NMU
+ <sect1 id="bug-monitoring">Monitoring bugs
<p>
-Only official, registered Debian maintainers can do binary or source
-NMUs. An official maintainer is someone who has their key in the
-Debian key ring. Non-developers, however, are encouraged to download
-the source package and start hacking on it to fix problems; however,
-rather than doing an NMU, they should just submit worthwhile patches
-to the Bug Tracking System. Maintainers almost always appreciate
-quality patches and bug reports.
-
-
- <sect1 id="nmu-when">When to do a source NMU
+If you want to be a good maintainer, you should periodically check the
+<url id="&url-bts;" name="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:
+<tt>http://&bugs-host;/<var>yourlogin</var>@debian.org</tt>.
<p>
-Guidelines for when to do a source NMU depend on the target
-distribution, i.e., stable, unstable, or experimental. Porters have
-slightly different rules than non-porters, due to their unique
-circumstances (see <ref id="source-nmu-when-porter">).
+Maintainers interact with the BTS via email addresses at
+<tt>&bugs-host;</tt>. Documentation on available commands can be
+found at <url id="&url-bts;">, or, if you have installed the
+<package>doc-debian</package> package, you can look at the local files
+&file-bts-docs;.
<p>
-When a security bug is detected, the security team may do an NMU.
-Please refer to <ref id="bug-security"> for more information.
+Some find it useful to get periodic reports on open bugs. You can add
+a cron job such as the following if you want to get a weekly email
+outlining all the open bugs against your packages:
+<example>
+# ask for weekly reports of bugs in my packages
+&cron-bug-report;
+</example>
+Replace <var>address</var> with your official Debian
+maintainer address.
+
+ <sect1 id="bug-answering">Responding to bugs
<p>
-During the release cycle (see <ref id="sec-dists">), NMUs which fix
-serious or higher severity bugs are encouraged and accepted. Even
-during this window, however, you should endeavor to reach the current
-maintainer of the package; they might be just about to upload a fix
-for the problem. As with any source NMU, the guidelines found in <ref
-id="nmu-guidelines"> need to be followed. Special exceptions are made
-for <ref id="qa-bsp">.
+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., <email>123@&bugs-host;</email>). If you're writing a new
+mail and you don't remember the submitter email address, you can
+use the <email>123-submitter@&bugs-host;</email> email to
+contact the submitter <em>and</em> to record your mail within the
+bug log (that means you don't need to send a copy of the mail to
+<email>123@&bugs-host;</email>).
<p>
-Uploading bug fixes to unstable by non-maintainers should only be done
-by following this protocol:
+If you get a bug which mentions "FTBFS", that means "Fails to build
+from source". Porters frequently use this acronym.
<p>
-<list>
- <item>
-Make sure that the package's bugs that the NMU is meant to address are all
-filed in the Debian Bug Tracking System (BTS).
-If they are not, submit them immediately.
- <item>
-Wait a few days the response from the maintainer. If you don't get
-any response, you may want to help him by sending the patch that fixes
-the bug. Don't forget to tag the bug with the "patch" keyword.
- <item>
-Wait a few more days. If you still haven't got an answer from the
-maintainer, send him a mail announcing your intent to NMU the package.
-Prepare an NMU as described in <ref id="nmu-guidelines">, test it
-carefully on your machine (cf. <ref id="upload-checking">).
-Double check that your patch doesn't have any unexpected side effects.
-Make sure your patch is as small and as non-disruptive as it can be.
- <item>
-Upload your package to incoming in <file>DELAYED/7-day</file> (cf.
-<ref id="delayed-incoming">), send the final patch to the maintainer via
-the BTS, and explain to them that they have 7 days to react if they want
-to cancel the NMU.
- <item>
-Follow what happens, you're responsible for any bug that you introduced
-with your NMU. You should probably use <ref id="pkg-tracking-system"> (PTS)
-to stay informed of the state of the package after your NMU.
-</list>
+Once you've dealt with a bug report (e.g. fixed it), mark it as
+<em>done</em> (close it) by sending an explanation message to
+<email>123-done@&bugs-host;</email>. If you're fixing a bug by
+changing and uploading the package, you can automate bug closing as
+described in <ref id="upload-bugfix">.
<p>
-At times, the release manager or an organized group of developers can
-announce a certain period of time in which the NMU rules are relaxed.
-This usually involves shortening the period during which one is to wait
-before uploading the fixes, and shortening the DELAYED period. It is
-important to notice that even in these so-called "bug squashing party"
-times, the NMU'er has to file bugs and contact the developer first,
-and act later.
+You should <em>never</em> close bugs via the bug server <tt>close</tt>
+command sent to &email-bts-control;. If you do so, the original
+submitter will not receive any information about why the bug was
+closed.
- <sect1 id="nmu-guidelines">How to do a source NMU
+ <sect1 id="bug-housekeeping">Bug housekeeping
<p>
-The following applies to porters insofar as they are playing the dual
-role of being both package bug-fixers and package porters. If a
-porter has to change the Debian source archive, automatically their
-upload is a source NMU and is subject to its rules. If a porter is
-simply uploading a recompiled binary package, the rules are different;
-see <ref id="porter-guidelines">.
+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 interesting to developers
+are described in the <url id="&url-bts-devel;" name="BTS documentation for
+Debian developers">. Operations such as reassigning, merging, and tagging
+bug reports are described in the <url id="&url-bts-control;" name="BTS
+control server documentation">. This section contains
+some guidelines for managing your own bugs, based on the collective
+Debian developer experience.
+ <p>
+Filing bugs for problems that you find in other packages is one of
+the "civic obligations" of maintainership, see <ref id="submit-bug">
+for details. However, handling the bugs in your own packages is
+even more important.
+ <p>
+Here's a list of steps that you may follow to handle a bug report:
+<enumlist>
+ <item>
+Decide whether the report corresponds to a real bug or not. Sometimes
+users are just calling a program in the wrong way because they haven't
+read the documentation. If you diagnose this, just close the bug with
+enough information to let the user correct their problem (give pointers
+to the good documentation and so on). If the same report comes up
+again and again you may ask yourself if the documentation is good
+enough or if the program shouldn't detect its misuse in order to
+give an informative error message. This is an issue that may need
+to be brought to the upstream author.
+ <p>
+If the bug submitter disagrees with your decision to close the bug,
+they may reopen it until you find an agreement on how to handle it.
+If you don't find any, you may want to tag the bug <tt>wontfix</tt>
+to let people know that the bug exists but that it won't be corrected.
+If this situation is unacceptable, you (or the submitter) may want to
+require a decision of the technical committee by reassigning the bug
+to <package>tech-ctte</package> (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 <url id="&url-tech-ctte;" name="recommended procedure">.
+ <item>
+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 may either ask for help on &email-debian-devel; or
+reassign it to <package>debian-policy</package> to let them decide which
+package is at fault.
+ <p>
+Sometimes you also have to adjust the severity of the bug so that it
+matches our definition of the severity. That's because people tend to
+inflate the severity of bugs to make sure their bugs are fixed quickly.
+Some bugs may even be dropped to wishlist severity when the requested
+change is just cosmetic.
+ <item>
+The bug submitter may have forgotten to provide some information, in which
+case you have to ask them the required information. You may use the
+<tt>moreinfo</tt> tag to mark the bug as such. Moreover if you can't
+reproduce the bug, you tag it <tt>unreproducible</tt>. Anyone who
+can reproduce the bug is then invited to provide more information
+on how to reproduce it. After a few months, if this information has not
+been sent by someone, the bug may be closed.
+ <item>
+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 <tt>help</tt>. You can
+also 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 that you send at the
+same time to the author. Make sure to send the patch in the BTS and to
+tag the bug as <tt>patch</tt>.
+ <item>
+If you have fixed a bug in your local copy, or if a fix has been
+committed to the CVS repository, you may tag the bug as
+<tt>pending</tt> to let people know that the bug is corrected and that
+it will be closed with the next upload (add the <tt>closes:</tt> in
+the <file>changelog</file>). This is particularly useful if you
+are several developers working on the same package.
+ <item>
+Once a corrected package is available in the <em>unstable</em>
+distribution, you can close the bug. This can be done automatically,
+read <ref id="upload-bugfix">.
+</enumlist>
+
+ <sect1 id="upload-bugfix">When bugs are closed by new uploads
<p>
-First and foremost, it is critical that NMU patches to source should
-be as non-disruptive as possible. Do not do housekeeping tasks, do
-not change the name of modules or files, do not move directories; in
-general, do not fix things which are not broken. Keep the patch as
-small as possible. If things bother you aesthetically, talk to the
-Debian maintainer, talk to the upstream maintainer, or submit a bug.
-However, aesthetic changes must <em>not</em> be made in a non-maintainer
-upload.
+As bugs and problems are fixed your packages, it is your
+responsibility as the package maintainer to close the bug. However,
+you should not close the bug until the package which fixes the bug has
+been accepted into the Debian archive. Therefore, once you get
+notification that your updated package has been installed into the
+archive, you can and should close the bug in the BTS.
+ <p>
+However, it's possible to avoid having to manually close bugs after the
+upload — just list the fixed bugs in your <file>debian/changelog</file>
+file, following a certain syntax, and the archive maintenance software
+will close the bugs for you. For example:
+<example>
+acme-cannon (3.1415) unstable; urgency=low
- <sect2 id="nmu-version">Source NMU version numbering
- <p>
-Whenever you have made a change to a package, no matter how trivial,
-the version number needs to change. This enables our packing system
-to function.
+ * Frobbed with options (closes: Bug#98339)
+ * Added safety to prevent operator dismemberment, closes: bug#98765,
+ bug#98713, #98714.
+ * Added man page. Closes: #98725.
+</example>
+
+Technically speaking, the following Perl regular expression describes
+how bug closing changelogs are identified:
+<example>
+ /closes:\s*(?:bug)?\#\s*\d+(?:,\s*(?:bug)?\#\s*\d+)*/ig
+</example>
+
+We prefer the <tt>closes: #<var>XXX</var></tt> syntax, as it is the
+most concise entry and the easiest to integrate with the text of the
+<file>changelog</file>.
+ <p>
+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 an <tt>reopen <var>XXX</var></tt> command to
+the bug tracking system's control address, &email-bts-control;. To
+close any remaining bugs that were fixed by your upload, email the
+<file>.changes</file> file to <email>XXX-done@&bugs-host;</email>,
+where <var>XXX</var> is your bug number.
+ <p>
+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 <email>XXX-done@&bugs-host;</email>. Do
+<strong>not</strong> 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.
<p>
-If you are doing a non-maintainer upload (NMU), you should add a new
-minor version number to the <var>debian-revision</var> part of the
-version number (the portion after the last hyphen). This extra minor
-number will start at `1'. For example, consider the package `foo',
-which is at version 1.1-3. In the archive, the source package control
-file would be <file>foo_1.1-3.dsc</file>. The upstream version is
-`1.1' and the Debian revision is `3'. The next NMU would add a new
-minor number `.1' to the Debian revision; the new source control file
-would be <file>foo_1.1-3.1.dsc</file>.
- <p>
-The Debian revision minor number is needed to avoid stealing one of
-the package maintainer's version numbers, which might disrupt their
-work. It also has the benefit of making it visually clear that a
-package in the archive was not made by the official maintainer.
- <p>
-If there is no <var>debian-revision</var> component in the version
-number then one should be created, starting at `0.1'. If it is
-absolutely necessary for someone other than the usual maintainer to
-make a release based on a new upstream version then the person making
-the release should start with the <var>debian-revision</var> value
-`0.1'. The usual maintainer of a package should start their
-<var>debian-revision</var> numbering at `1'.
+For general information on how to write your changelog entries, see
+<ref id="bpp-debian-changelog">.
- <sect2 id="nmu-changelog">
- <heading>Source NMUs must have a new changelog entry</heading>
- <p>
-A non-maintainer doing a source NMU must create a changelog entry,
-describing which bugs are fixed by the NMU, and generally why the NMU
-was required and what it fixed. The changelog entry will have the
-non-maintainer's email address in the log entry and the NMU version
-number in it.
- <p>
-By convention, source NMU changelog entries start with the line
-<example>
- * Non-maintainer upload
-</example>
+ <sect1 id="bug-security">Handling security-related bugs
+ <p>
+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 fix them themselves, sending
+security advisories, and maintaining security.debian.org.
+<!-- information about the security database goes here once it's ready -->
+<!-- (mdz) -->
- <sect2 id="nmu-patch">Source NMUs and the Bug Tracking System
- <p>
-Maintainers other than the official package maintainer should make as
-few changes to the package as possible, and they should always send a
-patch as a unified context diff (<tt>diff -u</tt>) detailing their
-changes to the Bug Tracking System.
- <p>
-What if you are simply recompiling the package? If you just need to
-recompile it for a single architecture, then you may do a binary-only
-NMU as described in <ref id="binary-only-nmu"> which doesn't require any
-patch to be sent. If you want the package to be recompiled for all
-architectures, then you do a source NMU as usual and you will have to
-send a patch.
- <p>
-If the source NMU (non-maintainer upload) fixes some existing bugs,
-these bugs should be tagged <em>fixed</em> in the Bug Tracking
-System rather than closed. By convention, only the official package
-maintainer or the original bug submitter are allowed to close bugs.
-Fortunately, Debian's archive system recognizes NMUs and thus marks
-the bugs fixed in the NMU appropriately if the person doing the NMU
-has listed all bugs in the changelog with the <tt>Closes:
-bug#<var>nnnnn</var></tt> syntax (see <ref id="upload-bugfix"> for
-more information describing how to close bugs via the changelog).
-Tagging the bugs <em>fixed</em> ensures that everyone knows that the
-bug was fixed in an NMU; however the bug is left open until the
-changes in the NMU are incorporated officially into the package by
-the official package maintainer.
- <p>
-Also, after doing an NMU, you have to open a new bug and include a
-patch showing all the changes you have made. Alternatively you can send
-that information to the existing bugs that are fixed by your NMU.
-The normal maintainer will either apply the patch or employ an alternate
-method of fixing the problem. Sometimes bugs are fixed independently
-upstream, which is another good reason to back out an NMU's patch.
-If the maintainer decides not to apply the NMU's patch but to release a
-new version, the maintainer needs to ensure that the new upstream version
-really fixes each problem that was fixed in the non-maintainer release.
- <p>
-In addition, the normal maintainer should <em>always</em> retain the
-entry in the changelog file documenting the non-maintainer upload.
+<p>
+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
+&email-security-team; as soon as possible. <strong>DO NOT UPLOAD</strong> any
+packages for stable; the security team will do that.
+Useful information includes, for example:
- <sect2 id="nmu-build">Building source NMUs
- <p>
-Source NMU packages are built normally. Pick a distribution using the
-same rules as found in <ref id="upload-dist">. Just as described in
-<ref id="uploading">, a normal changes file, etc., will be built. In
-fact, all the prescriptions from <ref id="upload"> apply.
- <p>
-Make sure you do <em>not</em> change the value of the maintainer in
-the <file>debian/control</file> file. Your name as given in the NMU entry of
-the <file>debian/changelog</file> file will be used for signing the
-changes file.
+<list compact>
+ <item>What 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.
- <sect1 id="ack-nmu">Acknowledging an NMU
- <p>
-If one of your packages has been NMU'ed, you have to incorporate the
-changes in your copy of the sources. This is easy, you just have
-to apply the patch that has been sent to you. Once this is done, you
-have to close the bugs that have been tagged fixed by the NMU. You
-can either close them manually by sending the required mails to the
-BTS or by adding the required <tt>closes: #nnnn</tt> in the changelog
-entry of your next upload.
- <p>
-In any case, you should not be upset by the NMU. An NMU is not a
-personal attack against the maintainer. It is a proof that
-someone cares enough about the package and that they were willing to help
-you in your work, so you should be thankful. You may also want to
-ask them if they would be interested to help you on a more frequent
-basis as co-maintainer or backup maintainer
-(see <ref id="collaborative-maint">).
+ <item>The nature of the fix, if any is available (patches are
+ especially helpful)
+ <item>Any fixed packages that you have prepared yourself (send only
+ the <tt>.diff.gz</tt> and <tt>.dsc</tt> files and read <ref
+ id="bug-security-building"> first)
- <sect id="porting">Porting and being ported
- <p>
-Debian supports an ever-increasing number of architectures. Even if
-you are not a porter, and you don't use any architecture but one, it
-is part of your duty as a maintainer to be aware of issues of
-portability. Therefore, even if you are not a porter, you should read
-most of this chapter.
- <p>
-Porting is the act of building Debian packages for architectures that
-is 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 <em>i386</em> binary package, there must be
-a recompile for each architecture, which amounts to
-&number-of-arches; more builds.
+ <item>Any assistance you can provide to help with testing (exploits,
+ regression testing, etc.)
+ <item>Any information needed for the advisory (see <ref
+ id="bug-security-advisories">)
- <sect1 id="kind-to-porters">Being kind to porters
- <p>
-Porters have a difficult and unique task, since they are required to
-deal with a large volume of packages. Ideally, every source package
-should build right out of the box. Unfortunately, this is often not
-the case. This section contains a checklist of ``gotchas'' often
-committed by Debian maintainers — common problems which often stymie
-porters, and make their jobs unnecessarily difficult.
- <p>
-The first and most important watchword is to respond quickly to bug or
-issues raised by porters. Please treat porters with courtesy, as if
-they were in fact co-maintainers of your package (which in a way, they
-are). Please be tolerant of succinct or even unclear bug reports,
-doing your best to hunt down whatever the problem is.
- <p>
-By far, most of the problems encountered by porters are caused by
-<em>packaging bugs</em> in the source packages. Here is a checklist
-of things you should check or be aware of.
+</list>
-<enumlist>
- <item>
-Make sure that your <tt>Build-Depends</tt> and
-<tt>Build-Depends-Indep</tt> settings in <file>debian/control</file>
-are set properly. The best way to validate this is to use the
-<package>debootstrap</package> package to create an unstable chroot
-environment. Within that chrooted environment, install the
-<package>build-essential</package> package and any package
-dependencies mentioned in <tt>Build-Depends</tt> and/or
-<tt>Build-Depends-Indep</tt>. Finally, try building your package
-within that chrooted environment. These steps can be automated
-by the use of the <prgn>pbuilder</prgn> program which is provided by
-the package of the same name.
- <p>
-See the <url id="&url-debian-policy;" name="Debian Policy
-Manual"> for instructions on setting build dependencies.
- <item>
-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 <url id="&url-debian-policy;" name="Debian Policy
-Manual">. Setting your architecture to ``i386'' is usually incorrect.
- <item>
-Make sure your source package is correct. Do <tt>dpkg-source -x
-<var>package</var>.dsc</tt> to make sure your source package unpacks
-properly. Then, in there, try building your package from scratch with
-<prgn>dpkg-buildpackage</prgn>.
- <item>
-Make sure you don't ship your source package with the
-<file>debian/files</file> or <file>debian/substvars</file> files.
-They should be removed by the `clean' target of
-<file>debian/rules</file>.
- <item>
-Make sure you don't rely on locally installed or hacked configurations
-or programs. For instance, you should never be calling programs in
-<file>/usr/local/bin</file> or the like. Try not to rely on programs
-be setup in a special way. Try building your package on another
-machine, even if it's the same architecture.
- <item>
-Don't depend on the package you're building already being installed (a
-sub-case of the above issue).
- <item>
-Don't rely on the compiler being a certain version, if possible. If
-not, then make sure your build dependencies reflect the restrictions,
-although you are probably asking for trouble, since different
-architectures sometimes standardize on different compilers.
- <item>
-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 <tt>dpkg-buildpackage -b</tt>.
- </enumlist>
+ <sect2 id="bug-security-confidentiality">Confidentiality
+ <p>
+Unlike most other activities within Debian, information about security
+issues must sometimes be kept private for a time.
+This allows software distributors to coordinate their disclosure in
+order to minimize their users' exposure. Whether this is the
+case depends on the nature of the problem and corresponding fix, and
+whether it is already a matter of public knowledge.
+<p>
+There are a few ways a developer can learn of a security problem:
- <sect1 id="porter-guidelines">Guidelines for porter uploads
- <p>
-If the package builds out of the box for the architecture to be ported
-to, you are in luck and your job is easy. This section applies to
-that case; it describes how to build and upload your binary package so
-that it is properly installed into the archive. If you do have to
-patch the package in order to get it to compile for the other
-architecture, you are actually doing a source NMU, so consult <ref
-id="nmu-guidelines"> instead.
- <p>
-For a porter upload, no changes are being made to the source. You do
-not need to touch any of the files in the source package. This
-includes <file>debian/changelog</file>.
- <p>
-The way to invoke <prgn>dpkg-buildpackage</prgn> is as
-<tt>dpkg-buildpackage -B -m<var>porter-email</var></tt>. Of course,
-set <var>porter-email</var> 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 <file>debian/rules</file>.
+<list compact>
+ <item>he notices it on a public forum (mailing list, web site, etc.)
+ <item>someone files a bug report
+ <item>someone informs them via private email
+</list>
- <sect2 id="binary-only-nmu">
- <heading>Recompilation or binary-only NMU</heading>
- <p>
-Sometimes the initial porter upload is problematic because the environment
-in 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
-(<prgn>katie</prgn> refuses to install new packages if they don't have a
-version number greater than the currently available one). Despite the
-required modification of the changelog, these are called binary-only NMUs
-— there is no need in this case to trigger all other architectures
-to consider themselves out of date or requiring recompilation.
- <p>
-Such recompilations require special ``magic'' version numbering, so that
-the archive maintenance tools recognize that, even though there is a
-new Debian version, there is no corresponding source update. If you
-get this wrong, the archive maintainers will reject your upload (due
-to lack of corresponding source code).
- <p>
-The ``magic'' for a recompilation-only NMU is triggered by using the
-third-level number on the Debian part of the version. For instance,
-if the latest version you are recompiling against was version
-``2.9-3'', your NMU should carry a version of ``2.9-3.0.1''. If the
-latest version was ``3.4-2.1'', your NMU should have a version number
-of ``3.4-2.1.1''.
+ In the first two cases, the information is public and it is important
+ to have a fix as soon as possible. In the last case, however, it
+ might not be public information. In that case there are a few
+ possible options for dealing with the problem:
+<list>
+ <item>If the security exposure is minor, there is sometimes no need
+ to keep the problem a secret and a fix should be made and released.
- <sect2 id="source-nmu-when-porter">
- <heading>When to do a source NMU if you are a porter</heading>
- <p>
-Porters doing a source NMU generally follow the guidelines found in
-<ref id="nmu">, just like non-porters. However, it is expected that
-the wait cycle for a porter's source NMU is smaller than for a
-non-porter, since porters have to cope with a large quantity of
-packages.
-Again, the situation varies depending on the distribution they are
-uploading to.
+ <item>If the problem is severe, it is preferable to share the
+ information with
+ other vendors and coordinate a release. The security team keeps
+ contacts with the various organizations and individuals and can take
+ care of that.
+</list>
-<!--
-FIXME: commented out until I can work out how to upload to testing directly
+<p>
+ In all cases if the person who reports the problem asks that it not
+ be disclosed, such requests should be honored, with the obvious
+ exception of informing the security team in order that a fix may be
+ produced for a stable release of Debian. When sending confidential
+ information to the security team, be sure to mention this fact.
- Crucial fixes (i.e., changes need to get a source
-package to compile for a released-targeted architecture) can be
-uploaded with <em>no</em> waiting period for the `frozen' distribution.
- -->
- <p>
-However, 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.)
- <p>
-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.
- <p>
-Porters should try to avoid patches which simply kludge around bugs in
-the current version of the compile environment, kernel, or libc.
-Sometimes such kludges can't be helped. If you have to kludge around
-compilers bugs and the like, make sure you <tt>#ifdef</tt> your work
-properly; also, document your kludge so that people know to remove it
-once the external problems have been fixed.
- <p>
-Porters may also have an unofficial location where they can put the
-results of their work during the waiting period. This helps others
-running the port have the benefit of the porter's work, even during
-the waiting period. Of course, such locations have no official
-blessing or status, so buyer, beware.
+<p>
+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.
+<p>
+There are two reasons for releasing information even though secrecy is
+requested: the problem has been known for a while, or the problem
+or exploit has become public.
- <sect1 id="porter-automation">
- <heading>Porting infrastructure and automation</heading>
+ <sect2 id="bug-security-advisories">Security Advisories
<p>
-There is infrastructure and several tools to help automate the package
-porting. This section contains a brief overview of this automation and
-porting to these tools; see the package documentation or references for
-full information.</p>
+Security advisories are only issued for the current, released stable
+distribution, and <em>not</em> for testing or unstable. When released,
+advisories
+are sent to the &email-debian-security-announce;
- <sect2>
- <heading>Mailing lists and web pages</heading>
- <p>
-Web pages containing the status of each port can be found at <url
-id="&url-debian-ports;">.
- <p>
-Each port of Debian has a mailing list. The list of porting mailing
-lists can be found at <url id="&url-debian-port-lists;">. These lists
-are used to coordinate porters, and to connect the users of a given
-port with the porters.</p>
- </sect2>
+mailing list and posted on <url
+id="&url-debian-security-advisories;" name="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 an advisory includes:
- <sect2>
- <heading>Porter tools</heading>
- <p>
-Descriptions of several porting tools can be found in <ref
-id="tools-porting">.</p>
- </sect2>
+<list compact>
+ <item>A description of the problem and its scope, including:
+ <list>
+ <item>The type of problem (privilege escalation, denial of
+ service, etc.)
+ <item>What privileges may be gained, and by whom (if any)
+ <item>How it can be exploited
+ <item>Whether it is remotely or locally exploitable
+ <item>How the problem was fixed
+ </list>
- <sect2 id="buildd">
- <heading><package>buildd</package></heading>
- <p>
-The <package>buildd</package> system is used as a distributed,
-client-server build distribution system. It is usually used in
-conjunction with <em>auto-builders</em>, 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.
- <p>
-<package>buildd</package> 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
-<package>sbuild</package>, see its description in <ref id="sbuild">.
-The complete <package>buildd</package> system also collects a number of as yet unpackaged
-components which are currently very useful and in use continually,
-such as <prgn>andrea</prgn> and
-<prgn>wanna-build</prgn>.
- <p>
-Some of the data produced by <package>buildd</package> which is
-generally useful to porters is available on the web at <url
-id="&url-buildd;">. This data includes nightly updated information
-from <prgn>andrea</prgn> (source dependencies) and
-<package>quinn-diff</package> (packages needing recompilation).
- <p>
-We are quite proud of this system, since it has so
-many possible uses. Independent development groups can use the system for
-different sub-flavors of Debian, which may or may not really be of
-general interest (for instance, a flavor of Debian built with <prgn>gcc</prgn>
-bounds checking). It will also enable Debian to recompile entire
-distributions quickly.
- </sect2>
+ This information allows users to assess the threat to their systems.
+ <item>Version numbers of affected packages
+ <item>Version numbers of fixed packages
+ <item>Information on where to obtain the updated packages
+ (usually from the Debian security archive)
+ <item>References to upstream advisories, <url
+ id="http://cve.mitre.org" name="CVE"> identifiers, and any other
+ information useful in cross-referencing the vulnerability
+</list>
+ <sect2 id="bug-security-building">
+ <heading>Preparing packages to address security issues</heading>
+ <p>
+One way that you can assist the security team in their duties is to
+provide them with fixed packages suitable for a security advisory for
+the stable
+Debian release.
+ <p>
+ When an update is made to the stable release, care must be taken to
+ avoid changing system behavior or introducing new bugs. In order to
+ do this, make as few changes as possible to fix the bug. Users and
+ administrators rely on the exact behavior of a release once it is
+ made, so any change that is made might break someone's system. This
+ is especially true of libraries: make sure you never change the API or
+ ABI, no matter how small the change.
+<p>
+This means that moving to a new upstream version is not a good
+solution. Instead, the relevant changes should be back-ported to the
+version present in the current stable Debian release. Generally,
+upstream maintainers are willing to help if needed. If not, the
+Debian security team may be able to help.
+<p>
+In some cases, it is not possible to back-port a security fix, for
+example when large amounts of source code need to be modified or
+rewritten. If this happens, it may be necessary to move to a new
+upstream version. However, this is only done in extreme situations,
+and you must always coordinate that with the security team beforehand.
+<p>
+Related to this is another important guideline: always test your
+changes. If you have an exploit available, try it and see if it
+indeed succeeds on the unpatched package and fails on the fixed
+package. Test other, normal actions as well, as sometimes a security
+fix can break seemingly unrelated features in subtle ways.
+<p>
+Do <strong>NOT</strong> include any changes in your package which are
+not directly related to fixing the vulnerability. These will only
+need to be reverted, and this wastes time. If there are other bugs in
+your package that you would like to fix, make an upload to
+proposed-updates in the usual way, after the security advisory is
+issued. The security update mechanism is not a means for introducing
+changes to your package which would otherwise be rejected from the
+stable release, so please do not attempt to do this.
+<p>
+Review and test your changes as much as possible. Check the
+differences from the previous version repeatedly
+(<prgn>interdiff</prgn> from the <package>patchutils</package> package
+and <prgn>debdiff</prgn> from <package>devscripts</package> are useful
+tools for this, see <ref id="debdiff">).
+<p>
+Be sure to verify the following items:
- <sect id="collaborative-maint">
- <heading>Collaborative maintenance</heading>
- <p>
-"Collaborative maintenance" is a term describing the sharing of Debian
-package maintenance duties by several people. This collaboration is
-almost always a good idea, since it generally results in higher quality and
-faster bug fix turnaround time. It is strongly recommended that
-packages in which a priority of <tt>Standard</tt> or which are part of
-the base set have co-maintainers.</p>
- <p>
-Generally there is a primary maintainer and one or more
-co-maintainers. The primary maintainer is the whose name is listed in
-the <tt>Maintainer</tt> field of the <file>debian/control</file> file.
-Co-maintainers are all the other maintainers.</p>
- <p>
-In its most basic form, the process of adding a new co-maintainer is
-quite easy:<list>
- <item>
- <p>
-Setup the co-maintainer with access to the sources you build the
-package from. Generally this implies you are using a network-capable
-version control system, such as <prgn>CVS</prgn> or
-<prgn>Subversion</prgn>.</p>
- </item>
- <item>
- <p>
-Add the co-maintainer's correct maintainer name and address to the
-<tt>Uploaders</tt> field in the global part of the
-<file>debian/control</file> file.
-<example>
-Uploaders: John Buzz <jbuzz@debian.org>, Adam Rex <arex@debian.org>
-</example>
-</p>
- </item>
- <item>
- <p>
-Using the PTS (<ref id="pkg-tracking-system">), the co-maintainers
-should subscribe themselves to the appropriate source package.</p>
- </item>
- </list></p>
- </sect>
+<list>
+ <item>Target the right distribution in your
+ <file>debian/changelog</file>. For stable this is <tt>stable-security</tt> and for
+ testing this is <tt>testing-security</tt>, and for the previous
+ stable release, this is <tt>oldstable-security</tt>. Do not target
+ <var>distribution</var>-proposed-updates or <tt>stable</tt>!
- <sect id="archive-manip">
- <heading>Moving, removing, renaming, adopting, and orphaning
- packages</heading>
- <p>
-Some archive manipulation operations are not automated in the Debian
-upload process. These procedures should be manually followed by
-maintainers. This chapter gives guidelines in what to do in these
-cases.
+ <item>The upload should have urgency=high.
- <sect1 id="moving-pkgs">Moving packages
- <p>
-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'.<footnote> See the <url id="&url-debian-policy;"
-name="Debian Policy Manual"> for guidelines on what section a package
-belongs in.
- </footnote>
- <p>
-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 <url id="&url-debian-policy;"
-name="Debian Policy Manual"> for details). If your new section is
-valid, it will be moved automatically. If it does not, then contact
-the ftpmasters in order to understand what happened.
- <p>
-If, on the other hand, you need to change the <em>subsection</em> 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 described in <ref id="override-file">.
+ <item>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 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 package and in the advisory.
+ <item>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 <tt>dpkg
+ --compare-versions</tt>. Be careful not to re-use a version
+ number that you have already used for a previous upload. For
+ <em>testing</em>, there must be
+ a higher version in <em>unstable</em>. If there is none yet (for example,
+ if <em>testing</em> and <em>unstable</em> have the same version) you must upload a
+ new version to unstable first.
- <sect1 id="removing-pkgs">Removing packages
- <p>
-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 <tt>ftp.debian.org</tt> asking that the
-package be removed. Make sure you indicate which distribution the
-package should be removed from. Normally, you can only have packages
-removed from <em>unstable</em> and <em>experimental</em>. Packages
-are not removed from <em>testing</em> directly. Rather, they will be
-removed automatically after the package has been removed from
-<em>unstable</em> and no package in <em>testing</em> depends on it.
- <p>
-You also have to detail the reasons justifying that request. This is to
-avoid unwanted removals and to keep a trace of why a package has been
-removed. For example, you can provide the name of the package that
+ <item>Do not make source-only uploads if your package has any
+ binary-all packages (do not use the <tt>-S</tt> option to
+ <prgn>dpkg-buildpackage</prgn>). The <prgn>buildd</prgn> infrastructure will
+ not build those. This point applies to normal package uploads as
+ well.
+
+ <item>Unless the upstream source has been uploaded to
+ security.debian.org before (by a previous security update), build
+ the upload with full upstream source (<tt>dpkg-buildpackage
+ -sa</tt>). If there has been a previous upload to
+ security.debian.org with the same upstream version, you may upload
+ without upstream source (<tt>dpkg-buildpackage -sd</tt>).
+
+ <item>Be sure to use the exact same <file>*.orig.tar.gz</file> as used in the
+ normal archive, otherwise it is not possible to move the security
+ fix into the main archives later.
+
+ <item>Build the package on a clean
+ system which only has packages installed from the distribution you
+ are building for. If you do not have such a system yourself, you
+ can use a debian.org machine (see <ref id="server-machines">)
+ or setup a chroot (see <ref id="pbuilder"> and
+ <ref id="debootstrap">).
+</list>
+
+ <sect2 id="bug-security-upload">Uploading the fixed package
+<p>
+Do <strong>NOT</strong> 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.
+<p>
+Do <strong>NOT</strong> 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 instead.
+<p>
+Once you have created and tested the new package and it has been
+approved by the security team, it needs to be uploaded so that it can
+be installed in the archives. For security uploads, the place to
+upload to is
+<tt>ftp://security.debian.org/pub/SecurityUploadQueue/</tt> .
+
+<p>
+Once an upload to the security queue has been accepted, the package
+will automatically be rebuilt for all architectures and stored for
+verification by the security team.
+
+<p>
+Uploads which are waiting for acceptance or verification are only
+accessible by the security team. This is necessary since there might
+be fixes for security problems that cannot be disclosed yet.
+
+<p>
+If a member of the security team accepts a package, it will be
+installed on security.debian.org as well as the proper
+<var>distribution</var>-proposed-updates on ftp-master or in the non-US
+archive.
+
+ <sect id="archive-manip">
+ <heading>Moving, removing, renaming, adopting, and orphaning
+ packages</heading>
+ <p>
+Some archive manipulation operations are not automated in the Debian
+upload process. These procedures should be manually followed by
+maintainers. This chapter gives guidelines in what to do in these
+cases.
+
+ <sect1 id="moving-pkgs">Moving packages
+ <p>
+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'.<footnote> See the <url id="&url-debian-policy;"
+name="Debian Policy Manual"> for guidelines on what section a package
+belongs in.
+ </footnote>
+ <p>
+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 <url id="&url-debian-policy;"
+name="Debian Policy Manual"> for details). If your new section is
+valid, it will be moved automatically. If it does not, then contact
+the ftpmasters in order to understand what happened.
+ <p>
+If, on the other hand, you need to change the <em>subsection</em> 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 described in <ref id="override-file">.
+
+
+ <sect1 id="removing-pkgs">Removing packages
+ <p>
+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 <tt>ftp.debian.org</tt> asking that the
+package be removed. Make sure you indicate which distribution the
+package should be removed from. Normally, you can only have packages
+removed from <em>unstable</em> and <em>experimental</em>. Packages
+are not removed from <em>testing</em> directly. Rather, they will be
+removed automatically after the package has been removed from
+<em>unstable</em> and no package in <em>testing</em> depends on it.
+ <p>
+You also have to detail the reasons justifying that request. This is to
+avoid unwanted removals and to keep a trace of why a package has been
+removed. For example, you can provide the name of the package that
supersedes the one to be removed.
<p>
-Usually you only ask the removal of a package maintained by yourself.
+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 last maintainer.
+of its maintainer.
<p>
If in doubt concerning whether a package is disposable, email
&email-debian-devel; asking for opinions. Also of interest is the
package. When invoked as <tt>apt-cache showpkg
<var>package</var></tt>, the program will show details for
<var>package</var>, including reverse depends.
+Removal of orphaned packages is discussed on &email-debian-qa;.
<p>
Once the package has been removed, the package's bugs should be handled.
They should either be reassigned to another package in the case where
In the past, it was possible to remove packages from <file>incoming</file>.
However, with the introduction of the new incoming system, this is no longer
possible. Instead, you have to upload a new revision of your package with
-a higher version as the package you want to replace. Both versions will be
+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 <em>unstable</em> since the previous version will immediately
be replaced by the higher. However, if you do proper testing of your
<sect1>Replacing or renaming packages
<p>
-Sometimes you made a mistake naming the package and you need to rename
-it. In this case, you need to follow a two-step process. First, set
+When you make a mistake naming your package, you should follow a two-step
+process to rename it. First, set
your <file>debian/control</file> file to replace and conflict with the
obsolete name of the package (see the <url id="&url-debian-policy;"
name="Debian Policy Manual"> for details). Once you've uploaded
against the pseudo package <package>wnpp</package>. The bug report should be
titled <tt>O: <var>package</var> -- <var>short description</var></tt>
indicating that the package is now orphaned. The severity of the bug
-should be set to <em>normal</em>. If you feel it's necessary, send a copy
+should be set to <em>normal</em>; 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 &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).
<p>
-If the package is especially crucial to Debian, you should instead submit
+If you just intend to give the package away, but you can keep maintainership
+for the moment, then you should instead submit
a bug against <package>wnpp</package> and title it <tt>RFA: <var>package</var> --
-<var>short description</var></tt> and set its severity to
-<em>important</em>. <tt>RFA</tt> stands for <em>Request For Adoption</em>.
-Definitely copy the message to debian-devel in this case, as described
-above.
+<var>short description</var></tt>.
+<tt>RFA</tt> stands for <em>Request For Adoption</em>.
<p>
-Read instructions on the <url id="&url-wnpp;" name="WNPP web pages">
-for more information.
+More information is on the <url id="&url-wnpp;" name="WNPP web pages">.
<sect1 id="adopting">Adopting a package
<p>
they will continue to receive the bugs during that time.
- <sect id="bug-handling">Handling package bugs
- <p>
-Often as a package maintainer, you find bugs in other packages or else
-have bugs reported to your packages which need to be reassigned. The
-<url id="&url-bts-control;" name="BTS instructions"> can tell you how
-to do this. Some information on filing bugs can be found in <ref
-id="submit-bug">.
+ <sect id="porting">Porting and being ported
+ <p>
+Debian supports an ever-increasing number of architectures. Even if
+you are not a porter, and you don't use any architecture but one, it
+is part of your duty as a maintainer to be aware of issues of
+portability. Therefore, even if you are not a porter, you should read
+most of this chapter.
+ <p>
+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 <em>i386</em> binary package, there must be
+a recompile for each architecture, which amounts to
+&number-of-arches; more builds.
- <sect1>Monitoring bugs
+
+ <sect1 id="kind-to-porters">Being kind to porters
<p>
-If you want to be a good maintainer, you should periodically check the
-<url id="&url-bts;" name="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:
-<tt>http://&bugs-host;/<var>yourlogin</var>@debian.org</tt>.
+Porters have a difficult and unique task, since they are required to
+deal with a large volume of packages. Ideally, every source package
+should build right out of the box. Unfortunately, this is often not
+the case. This section contains a checklist of ``gotchas'' often
+committed by Debian maintainers — common problems which often stymie
+porters, and make their jobs unnecessarily difficult.
<p>
-Maintainers interact with the BTS via email addresses at
-<tt>&bugs-host;</tt>. Documentation on available commands can be
-found at <url id="&url-bts;">, or, if you have installed the
-<package>doc-debian</package> package, you can look at the local files
-&file-bts-docs;.
+The first and most important thing is to respond quickly to bug or
+issues raised by porters. Please treat porters with courtesy, as if
+they were in fact co-maintainers of your package (which in a way, they
+are). Please be tolerant of succinct or even unclear bug reports,
+doing your best to hunt down whatever the problem is.
<p>
-Some find it useful to get periodic reports on open bugs. You can add
-a cron job such as the following if you want to get a weekly email
-outlining all the open bugs against your packages:
-<example>
-# ask for weekly reports of bugs in my packages
-&cron-bug-report;
-</example>
-Replace <var>address</var> with your official Debian
-maintainer address.
+By far, most of the problems encountered by porters are caused by
+<em>packaging bugs</em> in the source packages. Here is a checklist
+of things you should check or be aware of.
- <sect1 id="bug-answering">Responding to bugs
+<enumlist>
+ <item>
+Make sure that your <tt>Build-Depends</tt> and
+<tt>Build-Depends-Indep</tt> settings in <file>debian/control</file>
+are set properly. The best way to validate this is to use the
+<package>debootstrap</package> package to create an unstable chroot
+environment (see <ref id="debootstrap">).
+Within that chrooted environment, install the
+<package>build-essential</package> package and any package
+dependencies mentioned in <tt>Build-Depends</tt> and/or
+<tt>Build-Depends-Indep</tt>. Finally, try building your package
+within that chrooted environment. These steps can be automated
+by the use of the <prgn>pbuilder</prgn> program which is provided by
+the package of the same name (see <ref id="pbuilder">).
+ <p>
+If you can't set up a proper chroot, <prgn>dpkg-depcheck</prgn> may be
+of assistance (see <ref id="dpkg-depcheck">).
+ <p>
+See the <url id="&url-debian-policy;" name="Debian Policy
+Manual"> for instructions on setting build dependencies.
+ <item>
+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 <url id="&url-debian-policy;" name="Debian Policy
+Manual">. Setting your architecture to ``i386'' is usually incorrect.
+ <item>
+Make sure your source package is correct. Do <tt>dpkg-source -x
+<var>package</var>.dsc</tt> to make sure your source package unpacks
+properly. Then, in there, try building your package from scratch with
+<prgn>dpkg-buildpackage</prgn>.
+ <item>
+Make sure you don't ship your source package with the
+<file>debian/files</file> or <file>debian/substvars</file> files.
+They should be removed by the `clean' target of
+<file>debian/rules</file>.
+ <item>
+Make sure you don't rely on locally installed or hacked configurations
+or programs. For instance, you should never be calling programs in
+<file>/usr/local/bin</file> or the like. Try not to rely on programs
+being setup in a special way. Try building your package on another
+machine, even if it's the same architecture.
+ <item>
+Don't depend on the package you're building already being installed (a
+sub-case of the above issue).
+ <item>
+Don't rely on the compiler being a certain version, if possible. If
+not, then make sure your build dependencies reflect the restrictions,
+although you are probably asking for trouble, since different
+architectures sometimes standardize on different compilers.
+ <item>
+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 <tt>dpkg-buildpackage -B</tt>.
+ </enumlist>
+
+
+ <sect1 id="porter-guidelines">Guidelines for porter uploads
<p>
-Make sure that any discussion you have about bugs are sent both to
-the original submitter of the bug, and the bug itself (e.g.,
-<email>123@bugs.debian.org</email>). If you're writing a new
-mail and you don't remember the submitter email address, you can
-use the <email>123-submitter@bugs.debian.org</email> email to
-contact the submitter <em>and</em> to record your mail within the
-bug log (that means you don't need to send a copy of the mail to
-<email>123@bugs.debian.org</email>).
+If the package builds out of the box for the architecture to be ported
+to, you are in luck and your job is easy. This section applies to
+that case; it describes how to build and upload your binary package so
+that it is properly installed into the archive. If you do have to
+patch the package in order to get it to compile for the other
+architecture, you are actually doing a source NMU, so consult <ref
+id="nmu-guidelines"> instead.
<p>
-Once you've dealt with a bug report (e.g. fixed it), mark it as
-<em>done</em> (close it) by sending an explanation message to
-<email>123-done@bugs.debian.org</email>. If you're fixing a bug by
-changing and uploading the package, you can automate bug closing as
-described in <ref id="upload-bugfix">.
+For a porter upload, no changes are being made to the source. You do
+not need to touch any of the files in the source package. This
+includes <file>debian/changelog</file>.
<p>
-You should <em>never</em> close bugs via the bug server <tt>close</tt>
-command sent to &email-bts-control;. If you do so, the original
-submitter will not receive any information about why the bug was
-closed.
+The way to invoke <prgn>dpkg-buildpackage</prgn> is as
+<tt>dpkg-buildpackage -B -m<var>porter-email</var></tt>. Of course,
+set <var>porter-email</var> 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 <file>debian/rules</file>.
- <sect1 id="bug-housekeeping">Bug housekeeping
+ <sect2 id="binary-only-nmu">
+ <heading>Recompilation or binary-only NMU</heading>
<p>
-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 interesting to developers
-are described in the <url id="&url-bts-devel;" name="BTS documentation for
-Debian developers">. Operations such as reassigning, merging, and tagging
-bug reports are described in the <url id="&url-bts-control;" name="BTS
-control bot documentation">. This section contains
-some guidelines for managing your own bugs, based on the collective
-Debian developer experience.
- <p>
-Filing bugs for problems that you find in other packages is one of
-the "civic obligations" of maintainership, see <ref id="submit-bug">
-for details. However, handling the bugs in your own packages is
-even more important.
- <p>
-Here's a list of steps that you may follow to handle a bug report:
-<enumlist>
- <item>
-Decide whether the report corresponds to a real bug or not. Sometimes
-users are just calling a program in the wrong way because they haven't
-read the documentation. If you diagnose this, just close the bug with
-enough information to let the user correct his problem (give pointers
-to the good documentation and so on). If the same report comes up
-again and again you may ask yourself if the documentation is good
-enough or if the program shouldn't detect its misuse in order to
-give an informative error message. This is an issue that may need
-to be brought to the upstream author.
- <p>
-If the bug submitter disagree with your decision to close the bug,
-they may reopen it until you find an agreement on how to handle it.
-If you don't find any, you may want to tag the bug <tt>wontfix</tt>
-to let people know that the bug exists but that it won't be corrected.
-If this situation is unacceptable, you (or the submitter) may want to
-require a decision of the technical committee by reassigning the bug
-to <package>tech-ctte</package> (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 <url id="&url-tech-ctte;" name="recommended procedure">.
- <item>
-If the bug is real but it's caused by another package, just reassign
-the bug the right package. If you don't know which package it should
-be reassigned to, you may either ask for help on &email-debian-devel; or
-reassign it to <package>debian-policy</package> to let them decide which
-package is in fault.
- <p>
-Sometimes you also have to adjust the severity of the bug so that it
-matches our definition of the severity. That's because people tend to
-inflate the severity of bugs to make sure their bugs are fixed quickly.
-Some bugs may even be dropped to wishlist severity when the requested
-change is just cosmetic.
- <item>
-The bug submitter may have forgotten to provide some information, in that
-case you have to ask him the information required. You may use the
-<tt>moreinfo</tt> tag to mark the bug as such. Moreover if you can't
-reproduce the bug, you tag it <tt>unreproducible</tt>. Anyone who
-can reproduce the bug is then invited to provide more information
-on how to reproduce it. After a few months, if this information has not
-been sent by someone, the bug may be closed.
- <item>
-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 <tt>help</tt>. You can
-also 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 that you send at the
-same time to the author. Make sure to send the patch in the BTS and to
-tag the bug as <tt>patch</tt>.
- <item>
-If you have fixed a bug in your local copy, or if a fix has been
-committed to the CVS repository, you may tag the bug as
-<tt>pending</tt> to let people know that the bug is corrected and that
-it will be closed with the next upload (add the <tt>closes:</tt> in
-the <file>changelog</file>). This is particularly useful if you
-are several developers working on the same package.
- <item>
-Once a corrected package is available in the <em>unstable</em>
-distribution, you can close the bug. This can be done automatically,
-read <ref id="upload-bugfix">.
-</enumlist>
-
- <sect1 id="bug-security">Handling security-related bugs
- <p>
-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 fix them themselves, sending
-security advisories, and maintaining security.debian.org.
-
-<!-- information about the security database goes here once it's ready -->
-<!-- (mdz) -->
-
- <sect2 id="bug-security-you">What to do when you learn of a
- security problem
- <p>
-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
-&email-security-team;.
-Useful information includes, for example:
+Sometimes the initial porter upload is problematic because the environment
+in 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
+(<prgn>katie</prgn> refuses to install new packages if they don't have a
+version number greater than the currently available one). Despite the
+required modification of the changelog, these are called binary-only NMUs
+— there is no need in this case to trigger all other architectures
+to consider themselves out of date or requiring recompilation.
+ <p>
+Such recompilations require special ``magic'' version numbering, so that
+the archive maintenance tools recognize that, even though there is a
+new Debian version, there is no corresponding source update. If you
+get this wrong, the archive maintainers will reject your upload (due
+to lack of corresponding source code).
+ <p>
+The ``magic'' for a recompilation-only NMU is triggered by using the
+third-level number on the Debian part of the version. For instance,
+if the latest version you are recompiling against was version
+``2.9-3'', your NMU should carry a version of ``2.9-3.0.1''. If the
+latest version was ``3.4-2.1'', your NMU should have a version number
+of ``3.4-2.1.1''.
-<list compact>
- <item>What 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.
- <item>The nature of the fix, if any is available (patches are
- especially helpful)
+ <sect2 id="source-nmu-when-porter">
+ <heading>When to do a source NMU if you are a porter</heading>
+ <p>
+Porters doing a source NMU generally follow the guidelines found in
+<ref id="nmu">, just like non-porters. However, it is expected that
+the wait cycle for a porter's source NMU is smaller than for a
+non-porter, since porters have to cope with a large quantity of
+packages.
+Again, the situation varies depending on the distribution they are
+uploading to.
- <item>Any fixed packages that you have prepared yourself (send only
- the <tt>.diff.gz</tt> and <tt>.dsc</tt> files)
+<!--
+FIXME: commented out until I can work out how to upload to testing directly
- <item>Any information needed for the advisory (see <ref
- id="bug-security-advisories">)
+ Crucial fixes (i.e., changes need to get a source
+package to compile for a released-targeted architecture) can be
+uploaded with <em>no</em> waiting period for the `frozen' distribution.
+ -->
+ <p>
+However, 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.)
+ <p>
+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.
+ <p>
+Porters should try to avoid patches which simply kludge around bugs in
+the current version of the compile environment, kernel, or libc.
+Sometimes such kludges can't be helped. If you have to kludge around
+compilers bugs and the like, make sure you <tt>#ifdef</tt> your work
+properly; also, document your kludge so that people know to remove it
+once the external problems have been fixed.
+ <p>
+Porters may also have an unofficial location where they can put the
+results of their work during the waiting period. This helps others
+running the port have the benefit of the porter's work, even during
+the waiting period. Of course, such locations have no official
+blessing or status, so buyer beware.
-</list>
- <sect2 id="bug-security-confidentiality">Confidentiality
+ <sect1 id="porter-automation">
+ <heading>Porting infrastructure and automation</heading>
<p>
-Unlike most other activities within Debian, information about security
-issues must sometimes be kept private for a time. Whether this is the
-case depends on the nature of the problem and corresponding fix, and
-whether it is already a matter of public knowledge.
-<p>
-There are a few ways a developer can learn of a security problem:
-
-<list compact>
- <item>he notices it on a public forum (mailing list, web site, etc.)
- <item>someone files a bug report
- <item>someone informs him via private email
-</list>
-
- In the first two cases, the information is public and it is important
- to have a fix as soon as possible. In the last case, however, it
- might not be public information. In that case there are a few
- possible options for dealing with the problem:
+There is infrastructure and several tools to help automate the package
+porting. This section contains a brief overview of this automation and
+porting to these tools; see the package documentation or references for
+full information.</p>
-<list>
- <item>if it is a trivial problem (like insecure temporary files)
- there is no need to keep the problem a secret and a fix should be
- made and released.
+ <sect2>
+ <heading>Mailing lists and web pages</heading>
+ <p>
+Web pages containing the status of each port can be found at <url
+id="&url-debian-ports;">.
+ <p>
+Each port of Debian has a mailing list. The list of porting mailing
+lists can be found at <url id="&url-debian-port-lists;">. These lists
+are used to coordinate porters, and to connect the users of a given
+port with the porters.</p>
+ </sect2>
- <item>if the problem is severe (remotely exploitable, possibility to
- gain root privileges) it is preferable to share the information with
- other vendors and coordinate a release. The security team keeps
- contacts with the various organizations and individuals and can take
- care of that.
-</list>
+ <sect2>
+ <heading>Porter tools</heading>
+ <p>
+Descriptions of several porting tools can be found in <ref
+id="tools-porting">.</p>
+ </sect2>
-<p>
- In all cases if the person who reports the problem asks to not
- disclose the information that should be respected, with the obvious
- exception of informing the security team (make sure you tell the
- security team that the information can not be disclosed).
+ <sect2 id="buildd">
+ <heading><package>buildd</package></heading>
+ <p>
+The <package>buildd</package> system is used as a distributed,
+client-server build distribution system. It is usually used in
+conjunction with <em>auto-builders</em>, 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.
+ <p>
+<package>buildd</package> 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
+<package>sbuild</package>, see its description in <ref id="sbuild">.
+The complete <package>buildd</package> system also collects a number of as yet unpackaged
+components which are currently very useful and in use continually,
+such as <prgn>andrea</prgn> and
+<prgn>wanna-build</prgn>.
+ <p>
+Some of the data produced by <package>buildd</package> which is
+generally useful to porters is available on the web at <url
+id="&url-buildd;">. This data includes nightly updated information
+from <prgn>andrea</prgn> (source dependencies) and
+<package>quinn-diff</package> (packages needing recompilation).
+ <p>
+We are quite proud of this system, since it has so
+many possible uses. Independent development groups can use the system for
+different sub-flavors of Debian, which may or may not really be of
+general interest (for instance, a flavor of Debian built with <prgn>gcc</prgn>
+bounds checking). It will also enable Debian to recompile entire
+distributions quickly.
+ </sect2>
-<p>
-Please note that if secrecy is needed you can also not upload a fix to
-unstable (or anywhere else), since the changelog and diff information
-for unstable is public.
-<p>
-There are two reasons for releasing information even though secrecy is
-requested: the problem has been known for a while, or that the problem
-or exploit has become public.
+ <sect id="nmu">Non-Maintainer Uploads (NMUs)
+ <p>
+Under certain circumstances it is necessary for someone other than the
+official package maintainer to make a release of a package. This is
+called a non-maintainer upload, or NMU.
+ <p>
+Debian porters, who compile packages for different architectures,
+occasionally do binary-only NMUs as part of their porting activity
+(see <ref id="porting">). Another reason why NMUs are done is when a
+Debian developer needs to fix another developer's packages in order to
+address serious security problems or crippling bugs, especially during
+the freeze, or when the package maintainer is unable to release a fix
+in a timely fashion.
+ <p>
+This chapter contains information providing guidelines for when and
+how NMUs should be done. A fundamental distinction is made between
+source and binary-only NMUs, which is explained in the next section.
- <sect2 id="bug-security-advisories">Security Advisories
- <p>
-Security advisories are only issued for the current, released stable
-distribution, not for testing or unstable. When released, advisories
-are sent to the &email-debian-security-announce;
-mailing list and posted on <url
-id="&url-debian-security-advisories;" name="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 an advisory includes:
+ <sect1 id="nmu-terms">Terminology
+ <p>
+There are two new terms used throughout this section: ``binary-only NMU''
+and ``source NMU''. These terms are used with specific technical
+meaning 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
+<em>non-maintainer</em> upload.
+ <p>
+A source NMU is an upload of a package by a developer who is not the
+official maintainer, for the purposes of fixing a bug in the package.
+Source NMUs always involves changes to the source (even if it is just
+a change to <file>debian/changelog</file>). This can be either a
+change to the upstream source, or a change to the Debian bits of the
+source. Note, however, that source NMUs may also include
+architecture-dependent packages, as well as an updated Debian diff.
+ <p>
+A binary-only NMU is a recompilation and upload of a binary package
+for a given architecture. As such, it is usually part of a porting
+effort. A binary-only NMU is a non-maintainer uploaded binary version
+of a package, with no source changes required. There are many cases
+where porters must fix problems in the source in order to get them to
+compile for their target architecture; that would be considered a
+source NMU rather than a binary-only NMU. As you can see, we don't
+distinguish in terminology between porter NMUs and non-porter NMUs.
+ <p>
+Both classes of NMUs, source and binary-only, can be lumped by the
+term ``NMU''. However, this often leads to confusion, since most
+people think ``source NMU'' when they think ``NMU''. So it's best to
+be careful. In this chapter, if we use the unqualified term ``NMU'',
+we refer to any type of non-maintainer upload NMUs, whether source and
+binary, or binary-only.
-<list compact>
- <item>A description of the problem and its scope, including:
- <list>
- <item>The type of problem (privilege escalation, denial of
- service, etc.)
- <item>How it can be exploited
- <item>Whether it is remotely or locally exploitable
- <item>How the problem was fixed
- </list>
- <item>Version numbers of affected packages
- <item>Version numbers of fixed packages
- <item>Information on where to obtain the updated packages
- <item>References to upstream advisories, <url
- id="http://cve.mitre.org" name="CVE"> identifiers, and any other
- information useful in cross-referencing the vulnerability
-</list>
- <sect2 id="bug-security-building">
- <heading>Preparing packages to address security issues</heading>
- <p>
-One way that you can assist the security team in their duties is to
-provide fixed packages suitable for a security advisory for the stable
-Debian release.
- <p>
- When an update is made to the stable release, care must be taken to
- avoid changing system behavior or introducing new bugs. In order to
- do this, make as few changes as possible to fix the bug. Users and
- administrators rely on the exact behavior of a release once it is
- made, so any change that is made might break someone's system.
- This is especially true of libraries: make sure you never change the
- API or ABI, no matter how small the change.
-<p>
-This means that moving to a new upstream version is not a good
-solution. Instead, the relevant changes should be back-ported to the
-version present in the current stable Debian release. Generally,
-upstream maintainers are willing to help if needed. If not, the
-Debian security team may be able to help.
-<p>
-In some cases, it is not possible to back-port a security fix, for
-example when large amounts of source code need to be modified or
-rewritten. If this happens, it may be necessary to move to a new
-upstream version. However, you must always coordinate that with the
-security team beforehand.
-<p>
-Related to this is another important guideline: always test your
-changes. If you have an exploit available, try it and see if it
-indeed succeeds on the unpatched package and fails on the fixed
-package. Test other, normal actions as well, as sometimes a security
-fix can break seemingly unrelated features in subtle ways.
-<p>
-Review and test your changes as much as possible. Check the
-differences from the previous version repeatedly
-(<prgn>interdiff</prgn> from the <package>patchutils</package> package
-and <prgn>debdiff</prgn> from <package>devscripts</package> are useful tools for
-this).
+ <sect1 id="nmu-who">Who can do an NMU
+ <p>
+Only official, registered Debian maintainers can do binary or source
+NMUs. An official maintainer is someone who has their key in the
+Debian key ring. Non-developers, however, are encouraged to download
+the source package and start hacking on it to fix problems; however,
+rather than doing an NMU, they should just submit worthwhile patches
+to the Bug Tracking System. Maintainers almost always appreciate
+quality patches and bug reports.
-When packaging the fix, keep the following points in mind:
+ <sect1 id="nmu-when">When to do a source NMU
+ <p>
+Guidelines for when to do a source NMU depend on the target
+distribution, i.e., stable, unstable, or experimental. Porters have
+slightly different rules than non-porters, due to their unique
+circumstances (see <ref id="source-nmu-when-porter">).
+ <p>
+When a security bug is detected, the security team may do an NMU.
+Please refer to <ref id="bug-security"> for more information.
+ <p>
+During the release cycle (see <ref id="sec-dists">), NMUs which fix
+serious or higher severity bugs are encouraged and accepted. Even
+during this window, however, you should endeavor to reach the current
+maintainer of the package; they might be just about to upload a fix
+for the problem. As with any source NMU, the guidelines found in <ref
+id="nmu-guidelines"> need to be followed. Special exceptions are made
+for <ref id="qa-bsp">.
+ <p>
+Uploading bug fixes to unstable by non-maintainers should only be done
+by following this protocol:
+ <p>
<list>
- <item>Make sure you target the right distribution in your
- <file>debian/changelog</file>. For stable this is <tt>stable-security</tt> and for
- testing this is <tt>testing-security</tt>, and for the previous
- stable release, this is <tt>oldstable-security</tt>. Do not target
- <var>distribution</var>-proposed-updates!
+ <item>
+Make sure that the package's bugs that the NMU is meant to address are all
+filed in the Debian Bug Tracking System (BTS).
+If they are not, submit them immediately.
+ <item>
+Wait a few days for the response from the maintainer. If you don't get
+any response, you may want to help them by sending the patch that fixes
+the bug. Don't forget to tag the bug with the "patch" keyword.
+ <item>
+Wait a few more days. If you still haven't got an answer from the
+maintainer, send them a mail announcing your intent to NMU the package.
+Prepare an NMU as described in <ref id="nmu-guidelines">, test it
+carefully on your machine (cf. <ref id="sanitycheck">).
+Double check that your patch doesn't have any unexpected side effects.
+Make sure your patch is as small and as non-disruptive as it can be.
+ <item>
+Upload your package to incoming in <file>DELAYED/7-day</file> (cf.
+<ref id="delayed-incoming">), send the final patch to the maintainer via
+the BTS, and explain to them that they have 7 days to react if they want
+to cancel the NMU.
+ <item>
+Follow what happens, you're responsible for any bug that you introduced
+with your NMU. You should probably use <ref id="pkg-tracking-system"> (PTS)
+to stay informed of the state of the package after your NMU.
+</list>
+ <p>
+At times, the release manager or an organized group of developers can
+announce a certain period of time in which the NMU rules are relaxed.
+This usually involves shortening the period during which one is to wait
+before uploading the fixes, and shortening the DELAYED period. It is
+important to notice that even in these so-called "bug squashing party"
+times, the NMU'er has to file bugs and contact the developer first,
+and act later.
- <item>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 <tt>dpkg
- --compare-versions</tt>. For <em>testing</em>, there must be
- a higher version in <em>unstable</em>. If there is none yet (for example,
- if <em>testing</em> and <em>unstable</em> have the same version) you must upload a
- new version to unstable first.
+ <sect1 id="nmu-guidelines">How to do a source NMU
+ <p>
+The following applies to porters insofar as they are playing the dual
+role of being both package bug-fixers and package porters. If a
+porter has to change the Debian source archive, their upload is
+automatically a source NMU and is subject to its rules. If a porter is
+simply uploading a recompiled binary package, the rules are different;
+see <ref id="porter-guidelines">.
+ <p>
+First and foremost, it is critical that NMU patches to source should
+be as non-disruptive as possible. Do not do housekeeping tasks, do
+not change the name of modules or files, do not move directories; in
+general, do not fix things which are not broken. Keep the patch as
+small as possible. If things bother you aesthetically, talk to the
+Debian maintainer, talk to the upstream maintainer, or submit a bug.
+However, aesthetic changes must <em>not</em> be made in a non-maintainer
+upload.
- <item>Do not make source-only uploads if your package has any
- binary-all packages (do not use the <tt>-S</tt> option to
- <prgn>dpkg-buildpackage</prgn>). The <prgn>buildd</prgn> infrastructure will
- not build those. This point applies to normal package uploads as
- well.
- <item>If the upstream source has been uploaded to
- security.debian.org before (by a previous security update), build
- the upload without the upstream source (<tt>dpkg-buildpackage
- -sd</tt>). Otherwise, build with full source
- (<tt>dpkg-buildpackage -sa</tt>).
+ <sect2 id="nmu-version">Source NMU version numbering
+ <p>
+Whenever you have made a change to a package, no matter how trivial,
+the version number needs to change. This enables our packing system
+to function.
+ <p>
+If you are doing a non-maintainer upload (NMU), you should add a new
+minor version number to the <var>debian-revision</var> part of the
+version number (the portion after the last hyphen). This extra minor
+number will start at `1'. For example, consider the package `foo',
+which is at version 1.1-3. In the archive, the source package control
+file would be <file>foo_1.1-3.dsc</file>. The upstream version is
+`1.1' and the Debian revision is `3'. The next NMU would add a new
+minor number `.1' to the Debian revision; the new source control file
+would be <file>foo_1.1-3.1.dsc</file>.
+ <p>
+The Debian revision minor number is needed to avoid stealing one of
+the package maintainer's version numbers, which might disrupt their
+work. It also has the benefit of making it visually clear that a
+package in the archive was not made by the official maintainer.
+ <p>
+If there is no <var>debian-revision</var> component in the version
+number then one should be created, starting at `0.1'. If it is
+absolutely necessary for someone other than the usual maintainer to
+make a release based on a new upstream version then the person making
+the release should start with the <var>debian-revision</var> value
+`0.1'. The usual maintainer of a package should start their
+<var>debian-revision</var> numbering at `1'.
- <item>Be sure to use the exact same <file>*.orig.tar.gz</file> as used in the
- normal archive, otherwise it is not possible to move the security
- fix into the main archives later.
- <item>Be sure, when compiling a package, to compile on a clean
- system which only has packages installed from the distribution you
- are building for. If you do not have such a system yourself, you
- can use a debian.org machine (see <ref id="server-machines">)
- or setup a chroot (see <ref id="pbuilder"> and
- <ref id="debootstrap">).
-</list>
+ <sect2 id="nmu-changelog">
+ <heading>Source NMUs must have a new changelog entry</heading>
+ <p>
+A non-maintainer doing a source NMU must create a changelog entry,
+describing which bugs are fixed by the NMU, and generally why the NMU
+was required and what it fixed. The changelog entry will have the
+non-maintainer's email address in the log entry and the NMU version
+number in it.
+ <p>
+By convention, source NMU changelog entries start with the line
+<example>
+ * Non-maintainer upload
+</example>
- <sect2 id="bug-security-upload">Uploading the fixed package
-<p>
-<em>DO NOT</em> upload a package to the security upload queue 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.
-<p>
-<em>DO NOT</em> 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 instead.
-<p>
-Once you have created and tested the new package and it has been
-approved by the security team, it needs to be uploaded so that it can
-be installed in the archives. For security uploads, the place to
-upload to is
-<tt>ftp://security.debian.org/pub/SecurityUploadQueue/</tt> .
-<p>
-Once an upload to the security queue has been accepted, the package
-will automatically be rebuilt for all architectures and stored for
-verification by the security team.
+ <sect2 id="nmu-patch">Source NMUs and the Bug Tracking System
+ <p>
+Maintainers other than the official package maintainer should make as
+few changes to the package as possible, and they should always send a
+patch as a unified context diff (<tt>diff -u</tt>) detailing their
+changes to the Bug Tracking System.
+ <p>
+What if you are simply recompiling the package? If you just need to
+recompile it for a single architecture, then you may do a binary-only
+NMU as described in <ref id="binary-only-nmu"> which doesn't require any
+patch to be sent. If you want the package to be recompiled for all
+architectures, then you do a source NMU as usual and you will have to
+send a patch.
+ <p>
+If the source NMU (non-maintainer upload) fixes some existing bugs,
+these bugs should be tagged <em>fixed</em> in the Bug Tracking
+System rather than closed. By convention, only the official package
+maintainer or the original bug submitter are allowed to close bugs.
+Fortunately, Debian's archive system recognizes NMUs and thus marks
+the bugs fixed in the NMU appropriately if the person doing the NMU
+has listed all bugs in the changelog with the <tt>Closes:
+bug#<var>nnnnn</var></tt> syntax (see <ref id="upload-bugfix"> for
+more information describing how to close bugs via the changelog).
+Tagging the bugs <em>fixed</em> ensures that everyone knows that the
+bug was fixed in an NMU; however the bug is left open until the
+changes in the NMU are incorporated officially into the package by
+the official package maintainer.
+ <p>
+Also, after doing an NMU, you have to open a new bug and include a
+patch showing all the changes you have made. Alternatively you can send
+that information to the existing bugs that are fixed by your NMU.
+The normal maintainer will either apply the patch or employ an alternate
+method of fixing the problem. Sometimes bugs are fixed independently
+upstream, which is another good reason to back out an NMU's patch.
+If the maintainer decides not to apply the NMU's patch but to release a
+new version, the maintainer needs to ensure that the new upstream version
+really fixes each problem that was fixed in the non-maintainer release.
+ <p>
+In addition, the normal maintainer should <em>always</em> retain the
+entry in the changelog file documenting the non-maintainer upload.
-<p>
-Uploads which are waiting for acceptance or verification are only
-accessible by the security team. This is necessary since there might
-be fixes for security problems that cannot be disclosed yet.
-<p>
-If a member of the security team accepts a package, it will be
-installed on security.debian.org as well as the proper
-<var>distribution</var>-proposed-updates on ftp-master or in the non-US
-archive.
+ <sect2 id="nmu-build">Building source NMUs
+ <p>
+Source NMU packages are built normally. Pick a distribution using the
+same rules as found in <ref id="distribution">, follow the other
+prescriptions in <ref id="upload">.
+ <p>
+Make sure you do <em>not</em> change the value of the maintainer in
+the <file>debian/control</file> file. Your name as given in the NMU entry of
+the <file>debian/changelog</file> file will be used for signing the
+changes file.
- <sect1 id="upload-bugfix">When bugs are closed by new uploads
+ <sect1 id="ack-nmu">Acknowledging an NMU
<p>
-If you fix a bug in your packages, it is your responsibility as the
-package maintainer to close the bug when it has been fixed. However,
-you should not close the bug until the package which fixes the bug has
-been accepted into the Debian archive. Therefore, once you get
-notification that your updated package has been installed into the
-archive, you can and should close the bug in the BTS.
+If one of your packages has been NMU'ed, you have to incorporate the
+changes in your copy of the sources. This is easy, you just have
+to apply the patch that has been sent to you. Once this is done, you
+have to close the bugs that have been tagged fixed by the NMU. You
+can either close them manually by sending the required mails to the
+BTS or by adding the required <tt>closes: #nnnn</tt> in the changelog
+entry of your next upload.
<p>
-However, it's possible to avoid having to manually close bugs after the
-upload -- just list the fixed bugs in your <file>debian/changelog</file>
-file, following a certain syntax, and the archive maintenance software
-will close the bugs for you. For example:
-
-<example>
-acme-cannon (3.1415) unstable; urgency=low
+In any case, you should not be upset by the NMU. An NMU is not a
+personal attack against the maintainer. It is a proof that
+someone cares enough about the package and that they were willing to help
+you in your work, so you should be thankful. You may also want to
+ask them if they would be interested in helping you on a more frequent
+basis as co-maintainer or backup maintainer
+(see <ref id="collaborative-maint">).
- * Frobbed with options (closes: Bug#98339)
- * Added safety to prevent operator dismemberment, closes: bug#98765,
- bug#98713, #98714.
- * Added man page. Closes: #98725.
-</example>
-Technically speaking, the following Perl regular expression is what is
-used:
+ <sect id="collaborative-maint">
+ <heading>Collaborative maintenance</heading>
+ <p>
+"Collaborative maintenance" is a term describing the sharing of Debian
+package maintenance duties by several people. This collaboration is
+almost always a good idea, since it generally results in higher quality and
+faster bug fix turnaround time. It is strongly recommended that
+packages in which a priority of <tt>Standard</tt> or which are part of
+the base set have co-maintainers.</p>
+ <p>
+Generally there is a primary maintainer and one or more
+co-maintainers. The primary maintainer is the person whose name is listed in
+the <tt>Maintainer</tt> field of the <file>debian/control</file> file.
+Co-maintainers are all the other maintainers.</p>
+ <p>
+In its most basic form, the process of adding a new co-maintainer is
+quite easy:
+<list>
+ <item>
+ <p>
+Setup the co-maintainer with access to the sources you build the
+package from. Generally this implies you are using a network-capable
+version control system, such as <prgn>CVS</prgn> or
+<prgn>Subversion</prgn>.</p>
+ </item>
+ <item>
+ <p>
+Add the co-maintainer's correct maintainer name and address to the
+<tt>Uploaders</tt> field in the global part of the
+<file>debian/control</file> file.
<example>
- /closes:\s*(?:bug)?\#\s*\d+(?:,\s*(?:bug)?\#\s*\d+)*/ig
+Uploaders: John Buzz <jbuzz@debian.org>, Adam Rex <arex@debian.org>
</example>
-
-The author prefers the <tt>closes: #<var>XXX</var></tt> syntax, as
-one of the most concise and easiest to integrate with the text of the
-<file>changelog</file>.
- <p>
-If you happen to mistype a bug number or forget one in the changelog file,
-don't hesitate to undo any damage the error caused. To reopen wrongly closed
-bugs, send an <tt>reopen <var>XXX</var></tt> command in the bug tracking
-system's control bot. To close any remaining bugs that were fixed by your
-upload, email the <file>.changes</file> file to
-<email>XXX-done@bugs.debian.org</email>, where <var>XXX</var> is your
-bug number.
+</p>
+ </item>
+ <item>
+ <p>
+Using the PTS (<ref id="pkg-tracking-system">), the co-maintainers
+should subscribe themselves to the appropriate source package.</p>
+ </item>
+ </list></p>
<p>
-Bear in mind that it is not obligatory to close bugs using the changelog
-like described above -- if you simply want to close bugs that don't have
-anything to do with an upload of yours, do it simply by emailing an
-explanation to <email>XXX-done@bugs.debian.org</email>.
-
-
+Collaborative maintenance can often be further eased with the use of
+tools on Alioth (see <ref id="alioth">).
+ </sect>
<chapt id="best-pkging-practices">
available at <url id="&url-rules-files;">.
- <sect1 id="multiple-patches">
- <heading>Separating your patches into multiple files</heading>
+ <sect1 id="multiple-patches">
+ <heading>Separating your patches into multiple files</heading>
+ <p>
+Big, complex packages may have many bugs that you need to deal with.
+If you correct a number of bugs directly in the source, and you're not
+careful, it can get hard to differentiate the various patches that you
+applied. It can get quite messy when you have to update the package
+to a new upstream version which integrates some of the fixes (but not
+all). You can't take the total set of diffs (e.g., from
+<file>.diff.gz</file>) and work out which patch sets to back out as a
+unit as bugs are fixed upstream.
+ <p>
+Unfortunately, the packaging system as such currently doesn't provide for
+separating the patches into several files. Nevertheless, there are ways to
+separate patches: the patch files are shipped within the Debian patch file
+(<file>.diff.gz</file>), usually within the <file>debian/</file> directory.
+The only difference is that they aren't applied immediately by dpkg-source,
+but by the <tt>build</tt> rule of <file>debian/rules</file>. Conversely,
+they are reverted in the <tt>clean</tt> rule.
+ <p>
+<prgn>dbs</prgn> is one of the more popular approaches to this. It does all
+of the above, and provides a facility for creating new and updating old
+patches. See the package <package>dbs</package> for more information and
+<package>hello-dbs</package> for an example.
+ <p>
+<prgn>dpatch</prgn> also provides these facilities, but it's intented to be
+even easier to use. See the package <package>dpatch</package> for
+documentation and examples (in <file>/usr/share/doc/dpatch</file>).
+
+
+ <sect1 id="multiple-binary">Multiple binary packages
+ <p>
+A single source package will often build several binary packages,
+either to provide several flavors of the same software (e.g.,
+the <package>vim</package> source package) or to make several small
+packages instead of a big one (e.g., if the user can install only the
+subset she needs, and thus save some disk space).
+ <p>
+The second case can be easily managed in <file>debian/rules</file>.
+You just need to move the appropriate files from the build directory
+into the package's temporary trees. You can do this using
+<prgn>install</prgn> or <prgn>dh_install</prgn>
+from <package>debhelper</package>. Be sure to check the different
+permutations of the various packages, ensuring that you have the
+inter-package dependencies set right in <file>debian/control</file>.
+ <p>
+The first case is a bit more difficult since it involves multiple
+recompiles of the same software but with different configuration
+options. The <package>vim</package> source package is an example of how to manage
+this using an hand-crafted <file>debian/rules</file> file.
+
+<!-- &FIXME; Find a good debhelper example with multiple configure/make
+ cycles -->
+ </sect1>
+ </sect>
+
+
+ <sect id="bpp-debian-control">
+ <heading>Best practices for <file>debian/control</file></heading>
+ <p>
+The following practices are relevant to the
+<file>debian/control</file> file. They supplement the <url
+id="&url-debian-policy;ch-binary.html#s-descriptions"
+name="Policy on package descriptions">.
+ <p>
+The description of the package, as defined by the corresponding field
+in the <file>control</file> file, contains both the package synopsis
+and the long description for the package. <ref id="bpp-desc-basics">
+describes common guidelines for both parts of the package description.
+Following that, <ref id="bpp-pkg-synopsis"> provides guidelines
+specific to the synopsis, and <ref id="bpp-pkg-desc"> contains
+guidelines specific to the description.
+
+ <sect1 id="bpp-desc-basics">
+ <heading>General guidelines for package descriptions</heading>
+ <p>
+The package description should be written for the average likely user,
+the average person who will use and benefit from the package. For
+instance, development packages are for developers, and can be
+technical in their language. More general-purpose applications, such
+as editors, should be written for a less technical user.
+ <p>
+Our review of package descriptions lead us to conclude that most
+package descriptions are technical, that is, are not written to make
+sense for non-technical users. Unless your package really is only for
+technical users, this is a problem.
+ <p>
+How do you write for non-technical users? Avoid jargon. Avoid
+referring to other applications or frameworks that the user might not
+be familiar with — "GNOME" or "KDE" is fine, since users are
+probably familiar with these terms, but "GTK+" is
+probably not. Try not to assume any knowledge at all. If you must
+use technical terms, introduce them.
+ <p>
+Be objective. Package descriptions are not the place for advocating
+your package, no matter how much you love it. Remember that the
+reader may not care about the same things you care about.
+ <p>
+References to the names of any other software packages, protocol names,
+standards, or specifications should use their canonical forms, if one
+exists. For example, use "X Window System", "X11", or "X"; not "X
+Windows", "X-Windows", or "X Window". Use "GTK+", not "GTK" or "gtk".
+Use "GNOME", not "Gnome". Use "PostScript", not "Postscript" or
+"postscript".
+ <p>
+If you are having problems writing your description, you may wish to
+send it along to &email-debian-l10n-english; and request feedback.
+ </sect1>
+
+
+ <sect1 id="bpp-pkg-synopsis">
+ <heading>The package synopsis, or short description</heading>
+ <p>
+The synopsis line (the short description) should be concise. It
+must not repeat the package's name (this is policy).
+ <p>
+It's a good idea to think of the synopsis as an appositive clause, not
+a full sentence. An appositive clause is defined in WordNet as a
+grammatical relation between a word and a noun phrase that follows,
+e.g., "Rudolph the red-nosed reindeer". The appositive clause here is
+"red-nosed reindeer". Since the synopsis is a clause, rather than a
+full sentence, we recommend that it neither start with a capital nor
+end with a full stop (period). It should also not begin with an
+article, either definite ("the") or indefinite ("a" or "an").
+ <p>
+It might help to imagine that the synopsis is combined with the
+package name in the following way:
+
+<example><var>package-name</var> is a <var>synopsis</var>.</example>
+
+Alternatively, it might make sense to think of it as
+
+<example><var>package-name</var> is <var>synopsis</var>.</example>
+
+or, if the package name itself is a plural (such as
+"developers-tools")
+
+<example><var>package-name</var> are <var>synopsis</var>.</example>
+
+This way of forming a sentence from the package name and synopsis
+should be considered as a heuristic and not a strict rule. There are
+some cases where it doesn't make sense to try to form a sentence.
+ </sect1>
+
+ <sect1 id="bpp-pkg-desc">
+ <heading>The long description</heading>
+ <p>
+The long description is the primary information available to the user
+about a package before they install it. It should provide all the
+information needed to let the user decide whether to install the
+package. Assume that the user has already read the package synopsis.
+ <p>
+The long description should consist of full and complete sentences.
+ <p>
+The first paragraph of the long description should answer the
+following questions: what does the package do? what task does it help
+the user accomplish? It is important to describe this in a
+non-technical way, unless of course the audience for the package is
+necessarily technical.
+ <p>
+The following paragraphs should answer the following questions: Why do
+I as a user need this package? What other features does the package
+have? What outstanding features and deficiencies are there compared
+to other packages (e.g., "if you need X, use Y instead")? Is this
+package related to other packages in some way that is not handled by
+the package manager (e.g., "this is the client to the foo server")?
+ <p>
+Be careful to avoid spelling and grammar mistakes. Ensure that you
+spell-check it. <prgn>ispell</prgn> has a special <tt>-g</tt> option
+for <file>debian/control</file> files:
+
+<example>ispell -d american -g debian/control</example>
+ <p>
+User usually expect these questions to be answered in the package
+description.
+ <list>
+ <item>
+What does the package do? If it is an add-on to another package,
+then the short description of the package we are an add on to
+should be put in here.
+ <item>
+Why should I want this package? This is related to the above,
+but not the same (this is a mail user agent; this is cool, fast,
+interfaces with pgp and ldap and imap, has features X, Y, and Z).
+ <item>
+If this package should not be installed directly, but is pulled in
+by another package, this should be mentioned.
+ <item>
+If the package is experimental, or there are other reasons it
+should not be used, if there are other packages that should be
+used instead, it should be here as well.
+ <item>
+How is this package different from the competition? Is it a better
+implementation? more features? different features? Why should I
+choose this package (2. should talk about the class of packages, and
+this about this particular package, if you have information related to both).
+ </list>
+
+ </sect1>
+
+
+ <sect1 id="bpp-upstream-info">
+ <heading>Upstream home page</heading>
+ <p>
+We recommend that you add the URL for the package's home page to the
+package description in <file>debian/control</file>. This information
+should be added at the
+end of description, using the following format:
+
+<example> .
+ Homepage: http://some-project.some-place.org/</example>
+
+Note the spaces prepending the line, which serves to break the lines
+correctly. To see an example of how this displays, see <url
+id="&url-eg-desc-upstream-info;">.
<p>
-Big, complex packages may have many bugs that you need to deal with.
-If you correct a number of bug directly in the source, if you're not
-careful, it can get hard to differentiate the various patches that you
-applied. It can get quite messy when you have to update the package
-to a new upstream version which integrates some of the fixes (but not
-all). You can't take the total set of diffs (e.g., from
-<file>.diff.gz</file>) and work out which patch sets to back out as a
-unit as bugs are fixed upstream.
- <p>
-Unfortunately, the packaging system as such currently doesn't provide for
-separating the patches into several files. Nevertheless, there are ways to
-separate patches: the patch files are shipped within the Debian patch file
-(<file>.diff.gz</file>), usually within the <file>debian/</file> directory.
-The only difference is that they aren't applied immediately by dpkg-source,
-but by the <tt>build</tt> rule of <file>debian/rules</file>. Conversely,
-they are reverted in the <tt>clean</tt> rule.
- <p>
-<prgn>dbs</prgn> is one of the more popular approaches to this. It does all
-of the above, and provides a facility for creating new and updating old
-patches. See the package <package>dbs</package> for more information and
-<package>hello-dbs</package> for an example.
- <p>
-<prgn>dpatch</prgn> also provides these facilities, but it's intented to be
-even easier to use. See the package <package>dpatch</package> for
-documentation and examples (in <file>/usr/share/doc/dpatch</file>).
+If there is no home page for the software, this should naturally be
+left out.
+ <p>
+Note that we expect this field will eventually be replaced by a proper
+<file>debian/control</file> field understood by <prgn>dpkg</prgn> and
+<tt>&packages-host;</tt>. If you don't want to bother migrating the
+home page from the description to this field, you should probably wait
+until that is available.</p>
+ </sect1>
+ </sect>
- <sect1 id="multiple-binary">Multiple binary packages
- <p>
-A single source package will often build several binary packages,
-either to provide several flavors of the same software (examples are
-the <package>vim-*</package> packages) or to make several small
-packages instead of a big one (e.g., if the user can install only the
-subset she needs, and thus save some disk space).
- <p>
-The second case can be easily managed in <file>debian/rules</file>.
-You just need to move the appropriate files from the build directory
-into the package's temporary trees. You can do this using
-<prgn>install</prgn> (vanilla approach) or <prgn>dh_install</prgn>
-(from <package>debhelper</package>). Be sure to check the different
-permutations of the various packages, ensuring that you have the
-inter-package dependencies set right in <file>debian/control</file>.
- <p>
-The first case is a bit more difficult since it involves multiple
-recompiles of the same software but with different configure
-options. The <package>vim</package> is an example of how to manage
-this using an hand-crafted <file>debian/rules</file> file.
+ <sect id="bpp-debian-changelog">
+ <heading>Best practices for <file>debian/changelog</file></heading>
+ <p>
+The following practices supplement the <url name="Policy on changelog
+files" id="&url-debian-policy;ch-docs.html#s-changelogs">.</p>
-<!-- &FIXME; Find a good debhelper example with multiple configure/make
- cycles -->
+ <sect1 id="bpp-changelog-do">
+ <heading>Writing useful changelog entries</heading>
+ <p>
+The changelog entry for a package revision documents changes in that
+revision, and only them. Concentrate on describing significant and
+user-visible changes that were made since the last version.
+ <p>
+Focus on <em>what</em> was changed — who, how and when are
+usually less important. Having said that, remember to politely
+attribute people who have provided notable help in making the package
+(e.g., those who have sent in patches).
+ <p>
+There's no need to elaborate the trivial and obvious changes. You can
+also aggregate several changes in one entry. On the other hand, don't
+be overly terse if you have undertaken a major change. Be especially
+clear if there are changes that affect the behaviour of the program.
+For further explanations, use the <file>README.Debian</file> file.
+ <p>
+Use common English so that the majority of readers can comprehend it.
+Avoid abbreviations, "tech-speak" and jargon when explaining changes
+that close bugs, especially for bugs filed by users that did not
+strike you as particularly technically savvy. Be polite, don't swear.
+ <p>
+It is sometimes desirable to prefix changelog entries with the names
+of the files that were changed. However, there's no need to
+explicitly list each and every last one of the changed files,
+especially if the change was small or repetitive. You may use
+wildcards.
+ <p>
+When referring to bugs, don't assume anything. Say what the problem
+was, how it was fixed, and append the "closes: #nnnnn" string. See
+<ref id="upload-bugfix"> for more information.
+
+
+ <sect1 id="bpp-changelog-misconceptions">
+ <heading>Common misconceptions about changelog entries</heading>
+ <p>
+The changelog entries should <strong>not</strong> document generic
+packaging issues ("Hey, if you're looking for foo.conf, it's in
+/etc/blah/."), since administrators and users are supposed to be at
+least remotely acquainted with how such things are generally arranged
+on Debian systems. Do, however, mention if you change the location of
+a configuration file.
+ <p>
+The only bugs closed with a changelog entry should be those that are
+actually fixed in the same package revision. Closing unrelated bugs
+in the changelog is bad practice. See <ref id="upload-bugfix">.
+ <p>
+The changelog entries should <strong>not</strong> be used for random
+discussion with bug reporters ("I don't see segfaults when starting
+foo with option bar; send in more info"), general statements on life,
+the universe and everything ("sorry this upload took me so long, but I
+caught the flu"), or pleas for help ("the bug list on this package is
+huge, please lend me a hand"). Such things usually won't be noticed
+by their target audience, but may annoy people who wish to read
+information about actual changes in the package. See <ref
+id="bug-answering"> for more information on how to use the bug
+tracking system.
+ <p>
+It is an old tradition to acknowledge bugs fixed in non-maintainer
+uploads in the first changelog entry of the proper maintainer upload,
+for instance, in a changelog entry like this:
+<example>
+ * Maintainer upload, closes: #42345, #44484, #42444.
+</example>
+This will close the NMU bugs tagged "fixed" when the package makes
+it into the archive. The bug for the fact that an NMU was done can be
+closed the same way. Of course, it's also perfectly acceptable to
+close NMU-fixed bugs by other means; see <ref id="bug-answering">.
+ </sect1>
+
+ <sect1 id="bpp-changelog-errors">
+ <heading>Common errors in changelog entries</heading>
+ <p>
+The following examples demonstrate some common errors or example of
+bad style in changelog entries.
+
+ <p>
+<example>
+ * Fixed all outstanding bugs.
+</example>
+This doesn't tell readers anything too useful, obviously.
+
+ <p>
+<example>
+ * Applied patch from Jane Random.
+</example>
+What was the patch about?
+
+ <p>
+<example>
+ * Late night install target overhaul.
+</example>
+Overhaul which accomplished what? Is the mention of late night
+supposed to remind us that we shouldn't trust that code?
+
+ <p>
+<example>
+ * Fix vsync FU w/ ancient CRTs.
+</example>
+Too many acronyms, and it's not overly clear what the, uh, fsckup (oops,
+a curse word!) was actually about, or how it was fixed.
+
+ <p>
+<example>
+ * This is not a bug, closes: #nnnnnn.
+</example>
+First of all, there's absolutely no need to upload the package to
+convey this information; instead, use the bug tracking system.
+Secondly, there's no explanation as to why the report is not a bug.
+
+ <p>
+<example>
+ * Has been fixed for ages, but I forgot to close; closes: #54321.
+</example>
+If for some reason you didn't mention the bug number in a previous changelog
+entry, there's no problem, just close the bug normally in the BTS. There's
+no need to touch the changelog file, presuming the description of the fix is
+already in (this applies to the fixes by the upstream authors/maintainers as
+well, you don't have to track bugs that they fixed ages ago in your
+changelog).
+
+ <p>
+<example>
+ * Closes: #12345, #12346, #15432
+</example>
+Where's the description? If you can't think of a descriptive message,
+start by inserting the title of each different bug.
</sect1>
+
+ <sect1 id="bpp-news-debian">
+ <heading>Suplimenting changelogs with NEWS.Debian files</heading>
+ <p>
+Important news about changes in a package can also be put in NEWS.Debian
+files. The news will be displayed by tools like apt-listchanges, before
+all the rest of the changelogs. This is the preferred means to let the user
+know about significant changes in a package. It is better than using
+debconf notes since it is less annoying and the user can go back and refer
+to the NEWS.Debian file after the install. And it's better than listing
+major changes in README.Debian, since the user can easily miss such notes.
+ <p>
+The file format is the same as a debian changelog file, but leave off
+the asterisks and describe each news item with a full paragraph when
+necessary rather than the more concise summaries that would go in a
+changelog. It's a good idea to run your file through dpkg-parsechangelog to
+check its formatting as it will not be automatically checked during build
+as the changelog is. Here is an example of a real NEWS.Debian file:
+<example>
+cron (3.0pl1-74) unstable; urgency=low
+
+ The checksecurity script is no longer included with the cron package:
+ it now has its own package, "checksecurity". If you liked the
+ functionality provided with that script, please install the new
+ package.
+
+ -- Steve Greenland <stevegr&debian.org> Sat, 6 Sep 2003 17:15:03 -0500
+</example>
+ <p>
+The NEWS.Debian file is installed as
+/usr/share/doc/<package>/NEWS.Debian.gz. It is compressed, and
+always has that name even in Debian native packages. If you use debhelper,
+dh_installchangelogs will install debian/NEWS files for you.
+ <p>
+Unlike changelog files, you need not update NEWS.Debian files with every
+release. Only update them if you have something particularly newsworthy
+that user should know about. If you have no news at all, there's no need
+to ship a NEWS.Debian file in your package. No news is good news!
</sect>
- <sect id="bpp-debian-maint-scripts">
+<!--
+ <sect1 id="pkg-mgmt-cvs">Managing a package with CVS
+ <p>
+ &FIXME; presentation of cvs-buildpackage, updating sources
+ via CVS (debian/rules refresh).
+ <url id="http://www.debian.org/devel/cvs_packages">
+-->
+
+
+ <sect id="bpp-debian-maint-scripts">
<heading>Best practices for maintainer scripts</heading>
<p>
Maintainer scripts include the files <file>debian/postinst</file>,
passed as an argument. It returns true (zero) if the command was
found, and false if not. This is really the most portable way, since
<tt>command -v</tt>, <prgn>type</prgn>, and <prgn>which</prgn> are not
-POSIX. While <prgn>which</prgn> is an acceptable alternative, since
+POSIX.
+ <p>
+While <prgn>which</prgn> is an acceptable alternative, since
it is from the required <package>debianutils</package> package, it's
-not on the root partition, although that is probably not something
-that will cause a problem.
-
-
- <sect id="bpp-debian-control">
- <heading>Best practices for <file>debian/control</file></heading>
- <p>
-The following practices supplement the <url
- id="&url-debian-policy;ch-miscellaneous.html#s-descriptions"
- name="Policy on package descriptions">.</p>
-
- <sect1 id="bpp-pkg-desc">
- <heading>Writing useful descriptions</heading>
- <p>
-The description of the package (as defined by the corresponding field
-in the <file>control</file> file) is the primary information available
-to the user about a package before they install it. It should provide
-all the required information to let the user decide whether to install
-the package.
- <p>
-For consistency and aesthetics, you should capitalize the first letter
-of the Synopsis. Don't put a full stop (period) at the end. The
-description itself should consist of full sentences.
- <p>
-Since the first user impression is based on the description, be
-careful to avoid spelling and grammar mistakes. Ensure that you
-spell-check it. <prgn>ispell</prgn> has a special <tt>-g</tt> option
-for <file>debian/control</file> files:
-
-<example>ispell -d american -g debian/control</example>
-
-If you want someone to proofread the description that you
-intend to use you may ask on &email-debian-l10n-english;.
- </sect1>
-
- <sect1 id="bpp-upstream-info">
- <heading>Upstream home page</heading>
- <p>
-We recommend that you add the URL for the package's home page to the
-package description in <file>debian/control</file>. This information
-should be added at the
-end of description, using the following format:
-
-<example> .
- Homepage: http://some-project.some-place.org/</example>
-
-Note the spaces prepending the line, which serves to break the lines
-correctly. To see an example of how this displays, see <url
-id="&url-eg-desc-upstream-info;">.
- <p>
-If there is no home page for the software, this should naturally be
-left empty.
- <p>
-Note that we expect this field will eventually be replaced by a proper
-<file>debian/control</file> field understood by <prgn>dpkg</prgn> and
-<tt>&packages-host;</tt>. If you don't want to bother migrating the
-home page from the description to this field, you should probably wait
-until that is available.</p>
- </sect1>
+not on the root partition. That is, it's in <file>/usr/bin</file> rather
+than <file>/bin</file>, so one can't use it in scripts which are run
+before the <file>/usr</file> partition is mounted. Most scripts won't have
+this problem, though.
</sect>
-<!--
- <sect1 id="pkg-mgmt-cvs">Managing a package with CVS
- <p>
- &FIXME; presentation of cvs-buildpackage, updating sources
- via CVS (debian/rules refresh).
--->
-
<sect id="bpp-config-mgmt">
<heading>Configuration management with <package>debconf</package></heading>
-
<p>
<package>Debconf</package> is a configuration management system which
can be used by all the various packaging scripts
future.
<p>
Debconf is a great tool but it is often poorly used. Many common mistakes
-are listed in the <manref name="debconf-devel" section="8"> man page.
+are listed in the <manref name="debconf-devel" section="7"> man page.
It is something that you must read if you decide to use debconf.
</sect>
&file-lisp-controller;.
</list>
</sect1>
- </sect>
<!--
<sect1 id="custom-config-files">Custom configuration files
sympa may be an example package
-->
+ <sect1 id="bpp-archindepdata">
+ <heading>Architecture-independent data</heading>
+ <p>
+It is not uncommon to have a large amount of architecture-independent
+data packaged with a program. For example, audio files, a collection
+of icons, wallpaper patterns, or other graphic files. If the size of
+this data is negligible compared to the size of the rest of the
+package, it's probably best to keep it all in a single package.
+ <p>
+However, if the size of the data is considerable, consider splitting
+it out into a separate, architecture-independent package ("_all.deb").
+By doing this, you avoid needless duplication of the same data into
+eleven or more .debs, one per each architecture. While this
+adds some extra overhead into the <file>Packages</file> files, it
+saves a lot of disk space on Debian mirrors. Separating out
+architecture-independent data also reduces processing time of
+<prgn>lintian</prgn> or <prgn>linda</prgn> (see <ref id="tools-lint">)
+when run over the entire Debian archive.
+ </sect1>
+
+
+ <sect1 id="bpp-locale">
+ <heading>Needing a certain locale during build</heading>
+ <p>
+If you need a certain locale during build, you can create a temporary
+file via this trick:
+ <p>
+If you set LOCPATH to the equivalent of /usr/lib/locale, and LC_ALL to
+the name of the locale you generate, you should get what you want
+without being root. Something like this:
+
+<example>
+LOCALE_PATH=debian/tmpdir/usr/lib/locale
+LOCALE_NAME=en_IN
+LOCALE_CHARSET=UTF-8
+
+mkdir -p $LOCALE_PATH
+localedef -i "$LOCALE_NAME.$LOCALE_CHARSET" -f "$LOCALE_CHARSET" "$LOCALE_PATH/$LOCALE_NAME.$LOCALE_CHARSET"
+
+# Using the locale
+LOCPATH=$LOCALE_PATH LC_ALL=$LOCALE_NAME.$LOCALE_CHARSET date
+</example>
+ </sect1>
+
+ <sect1 id="bpp-transition">
+ <heading>Make transition packages deborphan compliant</heading>
+ <p>
+Deborphan is a program helping users to detect which packages can be safely
+removed from the system, ie the ones that have no packages depending on
+them. The default operation is to search only within the libs and oldlibs
+sections, to hunt down unused libraries. But when passed the right argument,
+it tries to catch other useless packages.
+ <p>
+For example, with --guess-dummy, tries to search all transitionnal packages
+which were needed for upgrade but which can now safely be removed. For that,
+it looks for the string "dummy" or "transitional" in their short
+description.
+ <p>
+So, when you are creating ssuch a package, please make sure to add this text
+to your short description. If you are looking for example, just run:
+ <example>apt-cache search .|grep dummy</example> or
+ <example>apt-cache search .|grep transitional</example>.
+ </sect1>
+ </sect>
+ </chapt>
<chapt id="beyond-pkging">
the most critical thing to spend their time on.
<sect id="submit-bug">
- <heading>Bug reporting</heading>
+ <heading>Bug reporting</heading>
<p>
We encourage you to file bugs as you find them in Debian packages. In
fact, Debian developers are often the first line testers. Finding and
-reporting bugs in other developer's packages improves the quality of
+reporting bugs in other developers' packages improves the quality of
Debian.
<p>
+Read the <url name="instructions for reporting bugs"
+id="&url-bts-report;"> in the Debian <url name="bug tracking system"
+id="&url-bts;">.
+ <p>
Try to submit the bug from a normal user account at which you are
-likely to receive mail. Do not submit bugs as root.
+likely to receive mail, so that people can reach you if they need
+further information about the bug. Do not submit bugs as root.
+ <p>
+You can use a tool like <manref name="reportbug" section="1"> to
+submit bugs. It can automate and generally ease the process.
+ <p>
+Make sure the bug is not already filed against a package.
+Each package has a bug list easily reachable at
+<tt>http://&bugs-host;/<var>packagename</var></tt>
+Utilities like <manref name="querybts" section="1"> can also
+provide you with this information (and <prgn>reportbug</prgn>
+will usually invoke <prgn>querybts</prgn> before sending, too).
+ <p>
+Try to direct your bugs to the proper location. When for example
+your bug is about a package that overwrites files from another package,
+check the bug lists for <em>both</em> of those packages in order to
+avoid filing duplicate bug reports.
<p>
-Make sure the bug is not already filed against a package. Try to do a
-good job reporting a bug and redirecting it to the proper location.
For extra credit, you can go through other packages, merging bugs
-which are reported more than once, or setting bug severities to
-`fixed' when they have already been fixed. Note that when you are
+which are reported more than once, or tagging bugs `fixed'
+when they have already been fixed. Note that when you are
neither the bug submitter nor the package maintainer, you should
not actually close the bug (unless you secure permission from the
maintainer).
with the bug reports that you submitted. Take this opportunity to
close those that you can't reproduce anymore. To find
out all the bugs you submitted, you just have to visit
-<tt>http://&bugs-host;/from:<your-email-addr></tt>.
+<tt>http://&bugs-host;/from:<var><your-email-addr></var></tt>.
<sect1 id="submit-many-bugs">Reporting lots of bugs at once
<p>
filing the same bug report simultaneously.
<p>
Note that when sending lots of bugs on the same subject, you should
-send the bug report to <email>maintonly@bugs.debian.org</email> so
+send the bug report to <email>maintonly@&bugs-host;</email> so
that the bug report is not forwarded to the bug distribution mailing
list.
haven't registered out of the system, so to speak. On the other hand,
it is also possible that they just need a reminder.
<p>
+There is a simple system (the MIA database) in which information about
+maintainers who are deemed inactive are recorded. When a member of the
+QA group contacts an inactive maintainer or finds more information about
+them, this is recorded in the MIA database. This system is available
+in /org/qa.debian.org/mia on the host qa.debian.org, and can be queried
+with a tool known as <prgn>mia-history</prgn>. By default,
+<prgn>mia-history</prgn> shows information about every person it knows
+about, but it accepts regular expressions as arguments which it uses to
+match user names. <example>mia-history --help</example> shows which
+arguments are accepted. If you find that no information has been recorded
+about an inactive maintainer already, or that you can add more information,
+you will generally proceed as follows.
+ <p>
The first step is to politely contact the maintainer, and wait for a
response, for a reasonable time. It is quite hard to define "reasonable
time", but it is important to take into account that real life is sometimes
non-Debian mailing lists or news groups.
</list>
<p>
-One big problem are packages which were sponsored -- the maintainer is not
+One big problem are packages which were sponsored — the maintainer is not
an official Debian developer. The echelon information is not available for
sponsored people, for example, so you need to find and contact the Debian
developer who has actually uploaded the package. Given that they signed the
People on this alias will use the information you provided in order to
decide how to proceed. For example, they might orphan one or all of the
packages of the maintainer. If a packages has been NMUed, they might prefer
-to contact the NMUer before orphaning the package -- perhaps the person who
+to contact the NMUer before orphaning the package — perhaps the person who
has done the NMU is interested in the package.
<p>
One last word: please remember to be polite. We are all volunteers and
cannot dedicate all of our time to Debian. Also, you are not aware of the
circumstances of the person who is involved. Perhaps they might be
-seriously ill or might even had died -- you do not know who may be on the
-receiving side -- imagine how a relative will feel if they read the e-mail
+seriously ill or might even had died — you do not know who may be on the
+receiving side — imagine how a relative will feel if they read the e-mail
of the deceased and find a very impolite, angry and accusing message!)
<p>
On the other hand, although we are volunteers, we do have a responsibility.
-So you can stress the importance of the greater good -- if a maintainer does
+So you can stress the importance of the greater good — if a maintainer does
not have the time or interest anymore, they should "let go" and give the
package to someone with more time.
email before the package is in acceptable shape. Being a sponsor
means being a mentor.
<p>
-Once the package meets Debian standards, build the package with
-<example>dpkg-buildpackage -us -uc</example> and sign it
-with <example>debsign -m"<var>FULLNAME</var> <var>email-addr</var>" <var>changes-file</var></example>
-before uploading it to the incoming directory.
+Once the package meets Debian standards, build and sign it with
+<example>dpkg-buildpackage -k<var>KEY-ID</var></example>
+before uploading it to the incoming directory. Of course, you can also
+use any part of your <var>KEY-ID</var>, as long as it's uniq in your
+secret keyring.
<p>
The Maintainer field of the <file>control</file> file and the
-<file>changelog</file> should list the person who did the packaging, i.e. the
+<file>changelog</file> should list the person who did the packaging, i.e., the
sponsoree. The sponsoree will therefore get all the BTS mail about the
package.
<p>
Application Managers"> at the Debian web site.
+ <chapt id="l10n">Internationalizing, translating, being internationalized
+ and being translated
+ <p>
+Debian supports an ever-increasing number of natural languages. Even if you are
+native English speaker and do not speak any other language, it is part of your
+duty as a maintainer to be aware of issues of internationalization (abbreviated
+i18n because there are 18 letters between the 'i' and the 'n' in
+internationalization). Therefore, even if you are ok with English only
+programs, you should read most of this chapter.
+ <p>
+According to <url id="http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/intro-i18n/"
+name="Introduction to i18n"> from Tomohiro KUBOTA, "I18N (internationalization)
+means modification of a software or related technologies so that a software can
+potentially handle multiple languages, customs, and so on in the world." while
+"L10N (localization) means implementation of a specific language for an already
+internationalized software."
+ <p>
+l10n and i18n are tied, but the difficulties related to each of them are very
+different. It's not really difficult to allow a program to change the language
+in which texts are displayed based on user settings, but it is very time
+consuming to actually translate these messages. On the other hand, setting the
+character encoding is trivial, but adapting the code to use several character
+encodings is a really hard problem.
+ <p>
+Letting alone the i18n problems, where no general receipt exist, there is
+actually no central infrastructure for l10n within Debian which could be
+compared to the dbuild mechanism for porting. So, most of the work has to be
+done manually.
+
+
+ <sect id="l10n-handling">How translations are handled within Debian
+ <p>
+Handling translation of the texts contained in a package is still a manual
+task, and the process depends on the kind of text you want to see translated.
+ <p>
+For program messages, the gettext infrastructure is used most of the time.
+Most of the time, the translation is handled upstream within projects like the
+<url id="http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/contrib/po/HTML/" name="Free Translation
+Project">, the <url id="http://developer.gnome.org/projects/gtp/" name="Gnome
+translation Project"> or the <url id="http://i18n.kde.org/" name="KDE one">.
+The only centralized resource within Debian is the <url
+id="http://www.debian.org/intl/l10n/" name="Central Debian translation
+statistics">, where you can find some statistics about the translation files
+found in the actual package, but no real infrastructure to ease the translation
+process.
+ <p>
+An effort to translate the package descriptions started long ago even if very
+few support is offered by the tools to actually use them (ie, only APT can use
+them, when configured correctly). There is nothing to do for the maintainers,
+and the translators should use the <url id="http://ddtp.debian.org/"
+name="DDTP">.
+ <p>
+For debconf templates, maintainer should use the po-debconf package to ease the
+work of translators, which could use the DDTP to do their work (but French and
+Brazilian teams don't). Some statistics can be found both on the DDTP site
+(about what is actually translated), and on the <url
+id="http://www.debian.org/intl/l10n/" name="Central Debian translation
+statistics"> site (about what is integrated in the packages).
+ p>
+For web pages, each l10n team has access to the relevant CVS, and the statistics
+are available from the Central Debian translation statistics site.
+ <p>
+For general documentation about Debian, the process is more or less the same
+than for the web pages (the translators have an access to the CVS), but there is
+no statistics pages.
+ <p>
+For package specific documentation (man pages, info document, other formats),
+almost everything have yet to be done. Most notably, the KDE project handles
+translation of its documentation in the same way as its program messages.
+Debian specific man pages begin to be handled within a <url
+id="http://cvs.debian.org/manpages/?cvsroot=debian-doc" name="specific CVS
+repository"> .
+
+
+ <sect id="l10n-faqm">I18N & L10N FAQ for maintainers
+ <p>
+This is a list of problems that maintainers may face concerning i18n and l10n.
+While reading this, keep in mind that there is no real consensus on those
+points within Debian, and that they are only advices. If you have a better idea
+for a given problem, or if you disagree on some points, feel free to provide
+your feedback, so that this document can be enhanced.
+
+ <sect1 id="l10n-faqm-tr">How to get a given text translated?
+ <p>
+To translate package description or debconf templates, you have nothing to do,
+the DDTP infrastructure will dispatch the material to translate to volunteers
+with no need for interaction from your part.
+ <p>
+For all other material (gettext files, man pages or other documentation), the
+best solution is to put your text somewhere on Internet, and ask on debian-i18n
+for a translation in the different languages. Some translation team members are
+subscribed to this list, and they will take care of the translation and of the
+reviewing process. Once done, you will get your translated document from them
+in your mailbox.
+
+ <sect1 id="l10n-faqm-rev">How to get a given translation reviewed?
+ <p>
+>From time to time, individuals translate some texts included in your package
+and will ask you for inclusion in the package. This can become problematic if
+you are not fluent in the given language. It is a good idea to send the
+document to the corresponding l10n mailing list, asking for a review. Once it
+has been done, you should feel more confident in the quality of the
+translation, and include it fearlessly into your package.
+
+ <sect1 id="l10n-faqm-update">How to get a given translation updated?
+ <p>
+If you have some translations of a given text laying around, each time you
+update the original, you should kindly ask to the previous translator to update
+his/her work to make the translation up to date with regard to the current
+original text. Keep in mind that this task takes time, at least one week to get
+the update reviewed and all.
+ <p>
+If the translator is unresponsive, you may ask for help to the corresponding
+l10n mailing list. If everything fails, don't forget to put a warning in the
+translated document, stating that the translation is somehow outdated, and that
+the reader should refer to the original document if possible.
+ <p>
+Avoid removing completely a translation because it is outdated. An old
+documentation is often better than no documentation at all for non-English
+speaker.
+
+ <sect1 id="l10n-faqm-bug">How to handle a bug report concerning a translation?
+ <p>
+The best solution may be to mark the bug as "forwarded to upstream", and
+forward it to both the previous translator and his/her team (using the
+corresponding debian-l10n-XXX mailing list).
+
+ <sect id="l10n-faqtr">I18N & L10N FAQ for translators
+ <p>
+While reading this, please keep in mind that there is no general procedure
+within Debian concerning those points, and that in any case, you should
+collaborate with your team and the package maintainer.
+
+ <sect1 id="l10n-faqtr-help">How to help the translation effort?
+ <p>
+Choose what you want to translate, make sure that nobody is already working on
+it (using your debian-l10n-XXX mailing list), translate it, get it reviewed by
+other native speakers on your l10n mailing list, and provide it to the
+maintainer of the package (see next point).
+
+ <sect1 id="l10n-faqtr-inc">How to provide a translation for inclusion in a package?
+ <p>
+Make sure your translation is correct (asking for review on your l10n mailing
+list) before providing it for inclusion. It will save time for everyone, and
+avoid the chaos resulting in having several versions of the same document in
+bug reports.
+ <p>
+The best solution is to fill a regular bug containing the translation against
+the package. Make sure to use the 'PATCH' tag, and to not use a gravity higher
+than 'wishlist', since the lack of translation never prevented a program from
+running.
+
+ <sect id="l10n-best">Best current practice concerning l10n
+ <p>
+<list>
+ <item>
+As a maintainer, never edit the translations in any way (even to reformat the
+layout) without asking to the corresponding l10n mailing list. You risk for
+example to break the encoding of the file by doing so. Moreover, what you
+consider as an error can be right (or even needed) in the given language.
+ <item>
+As a translator, if you find an error in the original text, make sure to report
+it. Translators are often the most attentive readers of a given text, and if
+they don't report the errors they find, nobody will.
+ <item>
+In any case, remember that the major issue with l10n is that it requires
+several people to cooperate, and that it is very easy to start a flamewar about
+small problems because of misunderstanding. So, if you have problems with your
+interlocutor, ask for help on the corresponding l10n mailing list, on
+debian-i18n, or even on debian-devel (but beware, l10n discussions very often
+become flamewars on that list :)
+ <item>
+In any case, cooperation can only be achieved with <strong>mutual respect</strong>.
+</list>
+
<appendix id="tools">Overview of Debian Maintainer Tools
<p>
option provides detailed explanations of what each error or warning means,
what is its basis in Policy, and commonly how you can fix the problem.
<p>
-Refer to <ref id="upload-checking"> for more information on how and when
+Refer to <ref id="sanitycheck"> for more information on how and when
to use Lintian.
<p>
You can also see a summary of all problems reported by Lintian on your
<package>lintian</package> but has a different set of checks. Its
written in Python rather than Perl.</p>
</sect1>
+
+ <sect1 id="debdiff">
+ <heading><package>debdiff</package></heading>
+ <p>
+<prgn>debdiff</prgn> (from the <package>devscripts</package> package, <ref id="devscripts">)
+compares file lists and control files of two packages. It is a simple
+regression test, as it will help you notice if the number of binary
+packages has changed since the last upload, or if something's changed
+in the control file. Of course, some of the changes it reports will be
+all right, but it can help you prevent various accidents.
+ <p>
+You can run it over a pair of binary packages:
+<example>
+debdiff package_1-1_arch.deb package_2-1_arch.deb
+</example>
+ <p>
+Or even a pair of changes files:
+<example>
+debdiff package_1-1_arch.changes package_2-1_arch.changes
+</example>
+ <p>
+For more information please see <manref name="debdiff" section="1">.
+ </sect1>
+
</sect>
+
<sect id="tools-helpers">
<heading>Helpers for <file>debian/rules</file></heading>
<p>
possibility of running <prgn>dinstall</prgn> in dry-run mode after the
upload.
</sect1>
+ <sect1 id="dcut">
+ <heading><package>dcut</package></heading>
+ <p>
+The <package>dcut</package> script (part of the package <ref id="dput">)
+helps in removing files from the ftp upload directory.
+ </sect1>
</sect>
<sect id="tools-maint-automate">
<file>debian/changelog</file>, there are handy functions for
finalizing a version and listing the package's current bugs.</p>
</sect1>
+
+ <sect1 id="dpkg-depcheck">
+ <heading><package>dpkg-depcheck</package></heading>
+ <p>
+<prgn>dpkg-depcheck</prgn> (from the <package>devscripts</package>
+package, <ref id="devscripts">)
+runs a command under <prgn>strace</prgn> to determine all the packages that
+were used by the said command.
+ <p>
+For Debian packages, this is useful when you have to compose a
+<tt>Build-Depends</tt> line for your new package: running the build
+process through <prgn>dpkg-depcheck</prgn> will provide you with a
+good first approximation of the build-dependencies. For example:
+<example>
+dpkg-depcheck -b debian/rules build
+</example>
+ <p>
+<prgn>dpkg-depcheck</prgn> can also be used to check for run-time
+dependencies, especially if your package uses exec(2) to run other
+programs.
+ <p>
+For more information please see <manref name="dpkg-depcheck" section="1">.
+ </sect1>
+
</sect>
<!-- FIXME: add the following
questionable:
+ dbs (referred to above)
+ dpatch (referred to above)
+ debarchiver
ucf
dpkg-awk
grep-dctrl
~ianmdlvl / developers-reference.git / blobdiff