X-Git-Url: http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/ucgi/~ianmdlvl/git?p=developers-reference.git;a=blobdiff_plain;f=developers-reference.sgml;h=cd1afddb347d697430027bdb87dc2786e2936cea;hp=d50321541c361f213156941c23ae71df3c1a2427;hb=8c24b8b229c9942ba4d27829d3a96ad68a6a7759;hpb=3d36d9a22c6d825a6842428744af43587c51f4d6 diff --git a/developers-reference.sgml b/developers-reference.sgml index d503215..cd1afdd 100644 --- a/developers-reference.sgml +++ b/developers-reference.sgml @@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ %commondata; - + @@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ Adam Di Carlo, current maintainer aph@debian.org Christian Schwarz schwarz@debian.org Ian Jackson ijackson@gnu.ai.mit.edu - ver. &version;, &date; + ver. &version;, &date-en; @@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. See the GNU General Public License for more details.

A copy of the GNU General Public License is available as &file-GPL; in -the Debian GNU/Linux distribution or on the World Wide Web at . You can also obtain it by writing to the &fsf-addr;. @@ -112,71 +112,69 @@ id="mentors"> for details. The IRC channel #debian on the Linux People IRC network (e.g., irc.debian.org) can also be helpful. +

+When you know how you want to contribute to &debian-formal;, you +should get in contact with existing Debian maintainers who are working +on similar tasks. That way, you can learn from experienced developers. +For example, if you are interested in packaging existing software for +Debian you should try to get a sponsor. A sponsor will work together +with you on your package and upload it to the Debian archive once he +is 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 +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 +Quality Assurance (QA) work you can join maintainers already working on +these tasks and submit patches and improvements. + Registering as a Debian developer

-Before you decide to register with the Debian Project, you will need -to read the . Registering as a developer means that you agree with and -pledge to uphold the Debian Social Contract; it is very important that -maintainers are in accord with the essential ideas behind Debian -GNU/Linux. Reading the . It describes exactly the +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 . +Registering as a developer means that you agree with and pledge to +uphold the Debian Social Contract; it is very important that +maintainers are in accord with the essential ideas behind +&debian-formal;. Reading the would also be a good idea.

The process of registering as a developer is a process of verifying -your identity and intentions. As the number of people working on -Debian GNU/Linux has grown to over &number-of-maintainers; people and -our systems are used in several very important places we have to be -careful about being compromised. Therefore, we need to verify new -maintainers before we can give them accounts on our servers and -letting them upload packages. -

-Registration requires that the following information be sent in -appropriate steps described at -after the initial contact to &email-new-maintainer: +your identity and intentions, and checking your technical skills. As +the number of people working on &debian-formal; has grown to over +&number-of-maintainers; people and our systems are used in several +very important places we have to be careful about being compromised. +Therefore, we need to verify new maintainers before we can give them +accounts on our servers and let them upload packages. +

+Before you actually register you should have shown that you can do +competent work and will be a good contributor. You can show this by +submitting patches through the Bug Tracking System or having a package +sponsored by an existing maintainer for a while. Also, we expect that +contributors are interested in the whole project and not just in +maintaining their own packages. If you can help other maintainers by +providing further information on a bug or even a patch, then do so! +

+Registration requires that you are familiar with Debian's philosophy +and technical documentation. Furthermore, you need a GPG key which +has been signed by an existing Debian maintainer. If your GPG key +is not signed yet, you should try to meet a Debian maintainer in +person to get your key signed. There's a which should help you find +a maintainer close to you (If you cannot find a Debian maintainer +close to you, there's an alternative way to pass the ID check. You +can send in a photo ID signed with your GPG key. Having your GPG +key signed is the preferred way, however. See the + for more +information about these two options.) - - -Your name. - -Your preferred login name on master (eight characters or -less), as well as the email address at which you'd prefer to be -subscribed to &email-debian-private; (typically this will be either -your primary mail address or your new debian.org address). - -A phone number where we can call you. Remember that the new -maintainer team usually calls during evening hours to save on long -distance tolls. Please do not give a work number, unless you are -generally there in the evening. - -A statement of intention, that is, what package(s) you intend to work -on, which Debian port you will be assisting, or how you intend to -contribute to Debian. - -A statement that you have read and agree to uphold the . - -Some mechanism by which we can verify your real-life identity. For -example, any of the following mechanisms would suffice: - - -An OpenPGP key signed by any well-known signature, such as: - - -Any current Debian developer you have met in real life. - -Any formal certification service (such as Verisign, etc.) that -verifies your identity. A certification that verifies your email -address, and not you identity, is not sufficient. - - -Alternatively, you may identify yourself with a scanned (or physically -mailed) copy of any formal documents certifying your identity (such as -a birth certificate, national ID card, U.S. Driver's License, etc.). -If emailed, please sign the mail with your OpenPGP key. - -

If you do not have an OpenPGP key yet, generate one. Every developer needs a OpenPGP key in order to sign and verify package uploads. You @@ -187,7 +185,7 @@ or high-powered spy techniques. See for more information on maintaining your public key.

Debian uses the GNU Privacy Guard (package -gnupg version 1 or better as its baseline standard. +gnupg version 1 or better) as its baseline standard. You can use some other implementation of OpenPGP as well. Note that OpenPGP is a open standard based on . @@ -200,13 +198,6 @@ much less secure. Your key must be signed with at least your own user ID; this prevents user ID tampering. gpg does this automatically.

-Also remember that one of the names on your key must match the email -address you list as the official maintainer for your packages. For -instance, I set the maintainer of the -developers-reference package to ``Adam Di Carlo -<aph@debian.org>''; therefore, one of the user IDs on my key is -that same value, ``Adam Di Carlo <aph@debian.org>''. -

If your public key isn't on public key servers such as &pgp-keyserv;, please read the documentation available locally in &file-keyservs;. That document contains instructions on how to put your key on the @@ -222,33 +213,33 @@ Some countries restrict the use of cryptographic software by their citizens. This need not impede one's activities as a Debian package maintainer however, as it may be perfectly legal to use cryptographic products for authentication, rather than encryption purposes (as is -the case in France). The Debian Project does not require the use of +the case in France). &debian-formal; does not require the use of cryptography qua cryptography in any manner. If you live in a country where use of cryptography even for authentication is forbidden then please contact us so we can make special arrangements.

-Once you have all your information ready, and your public key is -available on public key servers, send a message to -&email-new-maintainer; to register as an offical Debian developer so -that you will be able to upload your packages. This message must -contain your name and your valid e-mail address. All the information -discussed above is required after your Application Manager is -assigned. Application Manager is your agent in the registration -process, and you can always ask him about the status of your -application. You can check the as well. +To apply as a new maintainer, you need an existing Debian maintainer +to verify your application (an advocate). 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 +can contribute to Debian successfully. +

+When you have found an advocate, have your GPG key signed and have +already contributed to Debian for a while, you're ready to apply. +You can simply register on our . After you have signed up, your advocate +has to confirm your application. When your advocate has completed +this step you will be assigned an Application Manager who will +go with you through the necessary steps of the New Maintainer process. +You can always check your status on the .

For more details, please consult at the Debian web site. -

-Once this information is received and processed, you should be -contacted with information about your new Debian maintainer account. -If you don't hear anything within a month, please send a followup -message asking if your original application was received. Do -not re-send your original application, that will just confuse -the New Maintainer Group. Please be patient, especially near release -points; mistakes do occasionally happen, and people do sometimes run -out of volunteer time. +Maintainer's Corner"> at the Debian web site. Make sure that you +are familiar with the necessary steps of the New Maintainer process +before actually applying. If you are well prepared, you can save +a lot of timer later on. Debian Mentors @@ -275,7 +266,7 @@ 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 -here : . +at .

You have to keep the information available there up to date. @@ -309,10 +300,14 @@ you're on vacation. 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. Next you should update your information +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. +

+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. +to remove the ``on vacation'' flag when you come back! Coordination With Upstream Developers

@@ -339,31 +334,46 @@ Release Critical Bugs (RCB) are all bugs that have severity critical, grave or serious. Those bugs can delay the Debian release and/or can justify the removal of a package at freeze time. That's why -those bugs needs to be corrected as fast as possible. You must be +these bugs need to be corrected as quickly as possible. You must be aware that some developers who are part of the effort are -following those bugs and try to help you each time they can. But if +following those bugs and try to help you whenever they are able. But if you can't fix such bugs within 2 weeks, you should either ask for help by sending a mail to the Quality Assurance (QA) group -&email-debian-qa;, or justify yourself and present your plan to fix -it by sending a mail to the bug concerned report. Otherwise people +&email-debian-qa;, or explain your difficulties and present a plan to fix +them by sending a mail to the proper bug report. Otherwise, people from the QA group may want to do a Non-Maintainer Upload (see ) after trying to contact you (they might not wait as long as usual before they do their NMU if they have seen no recent activity from you -on the BTS). +in the BTS). Quality Assurance Effort

Even though there is a dedicated group of people for Quality -Assurance, QA duties are not reserved solely to them. You can -participate in this effort by keeping your packages as bug free as +Assurance, QA duties are not reserved solely for them. You can +participate in this effort by keeping your packages as bug-free as possible, and as lintian-clean (see ) as -possible. If you think that it's quite impossible, then you should -consider orphaning (see ) some of your packages so -that you can do a good job with the other packages that you -maintain. Alternatively you may ask the help of other people in order -to catch up the backlog of bugs that you have (you can ask for help on -&email-debian-qa; or &email-debian-devel;). +possible. If you do not find that possible, then you should consider +orphaning some of your packages (see ). Alternatively, you may ask the help of other people +in order to catch up the backlog of bugs that you have (you can ask +for help on &email-debian-qa; or &email-debian-devel;). + + Dealing with unreachable maintainers +

+If you notice that a package is lacking maintenance, you should +make sure the maintainer is active and will continue to work on +his packages. Try contacting him yourself. +

+If you do not get a reply after a few weeks you should collect all +useful information about this maintainer. Start by logging into +the +and doing a full search to check whether the maintainer is on vacation +and when he was last seen. Collect any important package names +he maintains and any Release Critical bugs filled against them. +

+Send all this information to &email-debian-qa;, in order to let the +QA people do whatever is needed. Retiring Gracefully

@@ -408,8 +418,8 @@ The following are the core Debian mailing lists: &email-debian-devel;, &email-debian-policy;, &email-debian-user;, &email-debian-private;, &email-debian-announce;, and &email-debian-devel-announce;. All developers are expected to be subscribed to at least -&email-debian-private; and &email-debian-devel-announce;. There are -other mailing lists are available for a variety of special topics; see +&email-debian-devel-announce;. There are +other mailing lists available for a variety of special topics; see for a list. Cross-posting (sending the same message to multiple lists) is discouraged.

@@ -418,7 +428,10 @@ discussions amongst Debian developers. It is meant to be used for posts which for whatever reason should not be published publically. As such, it is a low volume list, and users are urged not to use &email-debian-private; unless it is really necessary. Moreover, do -not forward email from that list to anyone. +not forward email from that list to anyone. Archives of this +list are not available on the web for obvious reasons, but you can see +them using your shell account master.debian.org and looking +in the ~debian/archive/debian-private directory.

&email-debian-email; is a special mailing list used as a grab-bag for Debian related correspondence such as contacting upstream authors @@ -559,7 +572,7 @@ id="&url-devel-machines;">. Overview

-The Debian GNU/Linux distribution consists of a lot of Debian packages +The &debian-formal; distribution consists of a lot of Debian packages (.deb's, currently around &number-of-pkgs;) and a few additional files (documentation, installation disk images, etc.).

@@ -598,10 +611,11 @@ further into subsections. Sections

The main section of the Debian archive is what makes up the -official Debian GNU/Linux distribution. -The main section is official because it fully complies with -all our guidelines. The other two sections do not, to different degrees; -as such, they are not officially part of Debian GNU/Linux. +official &debian-formal; distribution. The +main section is official because it fully complies with all +our guidelines. The other two sections do not, to different degrees; +as such, they are not officially part of +&debian-formal;.

Every package in the main section must fully comply with the (DFSG) and @@ -654,7 +668,7 @@ also have ports underway to non-Linux kernel. Aside from alpha, powerpc, sparc, hurd-i386, and arm, as of this writing.

-Debian GNU/Linux 1.3 is only available as i386. Debian 2.0 +&debian-formal; 1.3 is only available as i386. Debian 2.0 shipped for i386 and m68k architectures. Debian 2.1 ships for the i386, m68k, alpha, and sparc architectures. Debian 2.2 adds support for the @@ -714,7 +728,7 @@ To summarize, the Debian archive has a root directory within an FTP server. For instance, at the mirror site, ftp.us.debian.org, the Debian archive itself is contained in /debian, which is a common location -(another is /pub/debian). +(another is /pub/debian).

A distribution is comprised of Debian source and binary packages, and the respective Sources and Packages index files, containing @@ -723,9 +737,9 @@ the header information from all those packages. The former are kept in the directory of the archive (because of backwards compatibility). - Stable, testing, unstable, and sometimes frozen + Stable, testing, and unstable

-There is always a distribution called stable (residing in +There are always distributions called stable (residing in dists/stable), one called testing (residing in dists/testing), and one called unstable (residing in dists/unstable). This reflects the development process of the @@ -741,94 +755,91 @@ sometimes ``unstable.''

Packages get copied from unstable to testing if they satisfy certain criteria. To get into testing distribution, a -package needs to be in the archive for two weeks and not have any release -critical bugs. After that period, it will propagate into testing -as soon as anything it depends on is also added. This process is automatic. +package needs to be in the archive for two weeks and not have any +release critical bugs. After that period, it will propagate into +testing as soon as anything it depends on is also added. This +process is automatic. You can see some notes on this system as well +as update_excuses (describing which packages are valid +candidates, which are not, and why not) at .

After a period of development, once the release manager deems fit, the -testing distribution is renamed to frozen. Once -that has been done, no changes are allowed to that distribution except -bug fixes; that's why it's called ``frozen.'' After another month or -a little longer, depending on the progress, the frozen distribution +testing distribution is frozen, meaning that the policies +which control how packages move from unstable to testing are +tightened. Packages which are too buggy are removed. No changes are +allowed into testing except for bug fixes. After some time +has elapsed, depending on progress, the testing distribution goes into a `deep freeze', when no changes are made to it except those -needed for the installation system. This is called a ``test cycle'', and it -can last up to two weeks. There can be several test cycles, until the -distribution is prepared for release, as decided by the release manager. -At the end of the last test cycle, the frozen distribution is -renamed to stable, overriding the old stable distribution, -which is removed at that time. +needed for the installation system. This is called a ``test cycle'', +and it can last up to two weeks. There can be several test cycles, +until the distribution is prepared for release, as decided by the +release manager. At the end of the last test cycle, the +testing distribution is renamed to stable, +overriding the old stable distribution, which is removed at +that time (although it can be found at &archive-host;).

This development cycle is based on the assumption that the unstable distribution becomes stable after passing a -period of testing as frozen. Even once a distribution is -considered stable, a few bugs inevitably remain--that's why the stable -distribution is updated every now and then. However, these updates are -tested very carefully and have to be introduced into the archive -individually to reduce the risk of introducing new bugs. You can find -proposed additions to stable in the proposed-updates -directory. Those packages in proposed-updates that pass -muster are periodically moved as a batch into the stable distribution -and the revision level of the stable distribution is incremented -(e.g., `1.3' becomes `1.3r1', `2.0r2' becomes `2.0r3', and so forth). +period of being in testing. Even once a distribution is +considered stable, a few bugs inevitably remain &mdash that's why the +stable distribution is updated every now and then. However, these +updates are tested very carefully and have to be introduced into the +archive individually to reduce the risk of introducing new bugs. You +can find proposed additions to stable in the +proposed-updates directory. Those packages in +proposed-updates that pass muster are periodically moved as a +batch into the stable distribution and the revision level of the +stable distribution is incremented (e.g., `1.3' becomes `1.3r1', +`2.0r2' becomes `2.0r3', and so forth).

Note that development under unstable continues during the ``freeze'' period, since the unstable distribution remains in -place when the testing is moved to frozen. -Another wrinkle is that when the frozen distribution is -offically released, the old stable distribution is completely removed -from the Debian archives (although they do live on at -archive-host;). -

-In summary, there is always a stable, a testing and an -unstable distribution available, and a frozen distribution -shows up for a couple of months from time to time. - +place in parallel with testing. Experimental -

The experimental distribution is a specialty distribution. It is not a full distribution in the same sense as `stable' and `unstable' are. Instead, it is meant to be a temporary staging area for highly experimental software where there's a good chance that the -software could break your system. Users who download and install +software could break your system, or software that's just too unstable +even for the unstable distribution (but there is a reason to +package it nevertheless). Users who download and install packages from experimental are expected to have been duly warned. In short, all bets are off for the experimental distribution.

-Developers should be very selective in the use of the -experimental distribution. Even if a package is highly -unstable, it could still go into unstable; just state a -few warnings in the description. However, if there is a chance that -the software could do grave damage to a system, it might be better to -put it into experimental. -

-For instance, an experimental encrypted file system should probably go -into experimental. A new, beta, version of some software -which uses completely different configuration might go into -experimental at the maintainer's discretion. New software -which isn't likely to damage your system can go into -unstable. If you are working on an incompatible or complex -upgrade situation, you can also use experimental as a staging -area, so that testers can get early access. -

-However, using experimental as a personal staging area is not -always the best idea. You can't replace or upgrade the files in there -on your own (it is done with Debian archive maintenance software). -Additionally, you'll have to remember to ask the archive -maintainers to delete the package once you have uploaded it to -unstable. Using your personal web space on -klecker.debian.org is generally a better idea, so that you put -less strain on the Debian archive maintainers. +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 experimental. +For instance, an experimental compressed file system should probably go +into experimental. +

+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 experimental. A new, beta, version of some software +which uses completely different configuration can go into +experimental, at the maintainer's discretion. If you are working +on an incompatible or complex upgrade situation, you can also use +experimental as a staging area, so that testers can get early +access. +

+Some experimental software can still go into unstable, with a few +warnings in the description, but that isn't recommended because packages +from unstable are expected to propagate to testing and +thus to stable. +

+New software which isn't likely to damage your system can go directly into +unstable. +

+An alternative to experimental is to use your personal web space +on people.debian.org (klecker.debian.org). Release code names

Every released Debian distribution has a code name: Debian 1.1 is called `buzz'; Debian 1.2, `rex'; Debian 1.3, `bo'; Debian 2.0, -`hamm'; Debian 2.1, `slink'; and Debian 2.2, `potato'. There is also +`hamm'; Debian 2.1, `slink'; Debian 2.2, `potato'; and Debian 3.0, `woody'. There is also a ``pseudo-distribution'', called `sid', which is the current `unstable' distribution; since packages are moved from `unstable' to `testing' as they approach stability, `sid' itself is never released. @@ -857,9 +868,9 @@ determined by their code names and not their release status (e.g., `slink'). These names stay the same during the development period and after the release; symbolic links, which can be changed easily, indicate the currently released stable distribution. That's why the -real distribution directories use the code names, while symbolic -links for stable, testing, unstable, and -frozen point to the appropriate release directories. +real distribution directories use the code names, while +symbolic links for stable, testing, and +unstable point to the appropriate release directories. Package uploads @@ -874,18 +885,25 @@ not duplicated. Read the for more information.

Assuming no one else is already working on your prospective package, -you must then submit a short bug () against the -pseudo package wnpp and send a copy to &email-debian-devel; +you must then submit a bug report () against the +pseudo package wnpp describing your plan to create a new package, including, but not limiting yourself to, a description of the package, the license of the prospective package and the current URL where it can be downloaded -from. You should set the subject of the bug to ``ITP: foo +from. +

+You should set the subject of the bug to ``ITP: foo -- short description'', substituting the name of the new -package for foo. The severity of the bug report must be -set to wishlist. Please include a Closes: -bug#nnnnn entry on the changelog of the new package in -order for the bug report to be automatically closed once the new -package is installed on the archive (). +package for foo. The severity of the bug report must be set +to wishlist. If you feel it's necessary, send a copy to +&email-debian-devel; by putting the address in the X-Debbugs-CC: header +of the message (no, don't use CC:, because that way the message's subject +won't indicate the bug number). +

+Please include a Closes: bug#nnnnn entry on the +changelog of the new package in order for the bug report to be +automatically closed once the new package is installed on the archive +().

There are a number of reasons why we ask maintainers to announce their intentions: @@ -910,11 +928,38 @@ better feel of what is going on, and what is new, in the project. + Checking the package prior to upload +

+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): + + +Install the package and make sure the software works, or upgrade the +package from an older version to your new version if a Debian package +for it already exists. + +Run lintian over the package. You can run +lintian as follows: lintian -v +package-version.changes. This will check the source +package as well as the binary package. If you don't understand the +output that lintian generates, try adding the -i +switch, which will cause lintian to output a very verbose +description of the problem. +

+Normally, a package should not be uploaded if it causes lintian +to emit errors (they will start with E). +

+For more information on lintian, see . + +Downgrade the package to the previous version (if one exists) — this +tests the postrm and prerm scripts. + +Remove the package, then reinstall it. + - Uploading a package - - Generating the changes file + Generating the changes file

When a package is uploaded to the Debian FTP archive, it must be accompanied by a .changes file, which gives directions to the @@ -929,35 +974,10 @@ All of these fields are mandatory for a Debian upload. See the list of control fields in the for the contents of these fields. You can close bugs automatically using the Description field, see . Only the Distribution field is -discussed in this section, since it relates to the archive maintenance -policies. +id="upload-bugfix">. - Picking a distribution -

-Notably, the Distribution field, which originates from the -debian/changelog file, indicates which distribution the -package is intended for. There are four possible values for this -field: `stable', `unstable', `frozen', or `experimental'; these values -can also be combined. Or, if Debian has been frozen, and you -want to get a bug-fix release into frozen, you would set the -distribution to `frozen unstable'. (See for -more information on when to upload to frozen.) Note that it -never makes sense to combine the experimental distribution with -anything else. -

-You should avoid combining `stable' with others because of potential -problems with library dependencies (for your package and for the package -built by the build daemons for other architecture). -Also note that setting the distribution to `stable' means -that the package will be placed into the proposed-updates -directory of the Debian archive for further testing before it is actually -included in stable. The Release Team (which can be reached at -&email-debian-release;) will decide if your package can be included in -stable, therefore if your changelog entry is not clear enough, you may -want to explain them why you uploaded your package to stable by sending -them a short explication. + The original source tarball

The first time a version is uploaded which corresponds to a particular upstream version, the original source tar file should be uploaded and @@ -980,6 +1000,27 @@ is some reason why this is not the case, the new version of the original source should be uploaded, possibly by using the -sa flag. + + Picking a distribution +

+The Distribution field, which originates from the first line of +the debian/changelog file, indicates which distribution the +package is intended for. +

+There are three possible values for this field: `stable', `unstable', +and `experimental'. Normally, packages are uploaded into +unstable. +

+You should avoid combining `stable' with others because of potential +problems with library dependencies (for your package and for the package +built by the build daemons for other architecture). +See for more information on when and how to +upload to stable. +

+It never makes sense to combine the experimental distribution +with anything else. + + - Checking the package prior to upload -

-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): + Uploading to stable +

+Uploading to stable means that the package will be placed into the +proposed-updates directory of the Debian archive for further +testing before it is actually included in stable. +

+Extra care should be taken when uploading to stable. Basically, a +package should only be uploaded to stable if one of the following happens: - -Install the package and make sure the software works, or upgrade the -package from an older version to your new version if a Debian package -for it already exists. - -Run lintian over the package. You can run -lintian as follows: lintian -v -package-version.changes. This will check the source -package as well as the binary package. If you don't understand the -output that lintian generates, try adding the -i -switch, which will cause lintian to output a very verbose -description of the problem. -

-Normally, a package should not be uploaded if it causes lintian -to emit errors (they will start with E). -

-For more information on lintian, see . - -Downgrade the package to the previous version (if one exists) -- this -tests the postrm and prerm scripts. - -Remove the package, then reinstall it. - + a security problem (e.g. a Debian security advisory) + a truely critical functionality problem + the package becomes uninstallable + a released architecture lacks the package + +

+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 ("backporting" +the patch) is the right thing to do in most cases. +

+Packages uploaded to stable need to be compiled on systems running +stable, so that their dependencies are limited to the libraries +(and other packages) available in stable; for example, a package +uploaded to stable that depends on a library package that only +exists in unstable will be rejected. Making changes to dependencies of other +packages (by messing with Provides or shlibs files), possibly making +those other packages uninstallable, is strongly discouraged. +

+The Release Team (which can be reached at &email-debian-release;) will +regularly evaluate the uploads in proposed-updates and decide if +your package can be included in stable. Please be clear (and +verbose, if necessary) in your changelog entries for uploads to +stable, because otherwise the package won't be considered for +inclusion. + + Uploading a package + Uploading to ftp-master

To upload a package, you need a personal account on ftp-master.debian.org, which you should have as an official maintainer. If you use scp or rsync -to transfer the files, place them into &us-upload-dir;; +to transfer the files, place them into &us-upload-dir;; if you use anonymous FTP to upload, place them into -/pub/UploadQueue/. +/pub/UploadQueue/. 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 transfering +the changes file last, you can simply copy your files to a temporary +directory on ftp-master and then move them to +&us-upload-dir;.

Note: Do not upload to ftp-master packages containing software that is export-controlled by the United States @@ -1073,12 +1130,14 @@ to non-us (see ). If you are not sure whether U.S. export controls apply to your package, post a message to &email-debian-devel; and ask.

-You may also find the Debian package dupload useful -when uploading packages. This handy program is distributed with +You may also find the Debian packages dupload or +dput useful +when uploading packages. These handy program are distributed with defaults for uploading via ftp to ftp-master, chiark, and erlangen. It can also be configured to use ssh or rsync. See and for more information. +section="1">, and for more information.

After uploading your package, you can check how the archive maintenance software will process it by running dinstall on your changes @@ -1087,10 +1146,12 @@ file: dinstall -n foo.changes Uploading to non-US (pandora)

As discussed above, export controlled software should not be uploaded -to ftp-master. Instead, use scp or non-anonymous -FTP to copy the package to non-us.debian.org, placing -the files in &non-us-upload-dir;. By default, you can +to ftp-master. Instead, use scp or rsync +to copy the package to non-us.debian.org, placing +the files in &non-us-upload-dir;. By default, you can use the same account/password that works on ftp-master. +If you use anonymous FTP to upload, place the files into +/pub/UploadQueue/.

The program dupload comes with support for uploading to non-us; please refer to the documentation that comes with @@ -1198,15 +1259,9 @@ send those announcements (check its documentation and look for If a package is released with the Distribution: set to `stable', the announcement is sent to &email-debian-changes;. If a package is released with Distribution: set to `unstable', -`experimental', or `frozen' (when present), the announcement will be +or `experimental', the announcement will be posted to &email-debian-devel-changes; instead.

-On occasion, it is necessary to upload a package to both the -stable and unstable distributions; this is done by -putting both distributions in the Distribution: line. In -such a case the upload announcement will go to both of the above -mailing lists. -

The dupload program is clever enough to determine where the announcement should go, and will automatically mail the announcement to the right list. See . @@ -1216,8 +1271,7 @@ announcement to the right list. See .

The Debian archive maintainers are responsible for handling package uploads. For the most part, uploads are automatically handled on a -daily basis by archive maintenance tools `dak' -(also referred to as katie or dinstall). +daily basis by the archive maintenance tools, katie. Specifically, updates to existing packages to the `unstable' distribution are handled automatically. In other cases, notably new packages, placing the uploaded package into the @@ -1226,9 +1280,13 @@ the change to the archive may take up to a month to occur. Please be patient.

In any case, you will receive email notification indicating that the -package has been uploaded. Please examine this notification -carefully. You may notice that the package didn't go into the section -you thought you set it to go into. Read on for why. +package has added to the archive, which also indicates which bugs will +be closed by the upload. Please examine this notification carefully, +checking if any bugs you meant to close didn't get triggered. +

+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. The override file

@@ -1240,11 +1298,20 @@ have control over these fields. The values in the debian/control file are actually just hints.

The archive maintainers keep track of the canonical sections and -priorities for packages in the override file. Sometimes the -override file needs correcting. Simply changing the -package's control file is not going to work. Instead, -you should email &email-override; or submit a bug against -ftp.debian.org. +priorities for packages in the override file. If there is a +disparity between the override file and the package's fields +as indicated in debian/control, then you will receive an +email noting the divergence when the package is installed into the +archive. You can either correct your debian/control file +for your next upload, or else you may wish to make a change in the +override file. +

+To alter the actual section that a package is put in, you need to +first make sure that the debian/control in your package +is accurate. Next, send an email &email-override; or submit a bug +against ftp.debian.org requesting that the section +or priority for your package be changed from the old section or +priority to the new one. Be sure to explain your reasoning.

For more information about override files, see , &file-bts-mailing;, and @@ -1268,13 +1335,13 @@ in a timely fashion.

This chapter contains information providing guidelines for when and how NMUs should be done. A fundamental distinction is made between -source and binary NMUs, which is explained in the next section. +source and binary-only NMUs, which is explained in the next section. Terminology

-There are two new terms used throughout this section: ``binary NMU'' +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 and source NMUs are +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 non-maintainer upload. @@ -1282,24 +1349,27 @@ is not the official maintainer of that package. That is why it's a 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 debian/changelog). This can be either a change -to the upstream source, or a change to the Debian bits of the source. -

-A binary NMU is a recompilation and upload of a binary package for a -new architecture. As such, it is usually part of a porting effort. A -binary NMU is a non-maintainer uploaded binary version of a package -(often for another architecture), 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 NMU. As you can see, -we don't distinguish in terminology between porter NMUs and non-porter -NMUs. -

-Both classes of NMUs, source and binary, 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 I use the unqualified term ``NMU'', I -mean both source and binary NMUs. +a change to debian/changelog). 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 +(or, more rarely, new upstream source as well). +

+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. +

+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. Who can do an NMU @@ -1316,25 +1386,24 @@ quality patches and bug reports. When to do a source NMU

Guidelines for when to do a source NMU depend on the target -distribution, i.e., stable, unstable, or frozen. Porters have +distribution, i.e., stable, unstable, or experimental. Porters have slightly different rules than non-porters, due to their unique circumstances (see ).

-Only critical changes or security bug fixes make it into stable. When -a security bug is detected, a fixed package should be uploaded as soon -as possible. In this case, the Debian Security Managers should get in +When a security bug is detected, a fixed package should be uploaded +as soon as possible. In this case, the Debian security officers get in contact with the package maintainer to make sure a fixed package is uploaded within a reasonable time (less than 48 hours). If the package maintainer cannot provide a fixed package fast enough or if he/she -cannot be reached in time, the Security Manager may upload a fixed +cannot be reached in time, a security officer may upload a fixed package (i.e., do a source NMU).

-During the release freeze (see ), 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 need to be followed. +During the release cycle (see ), 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 need to be followed.

Bug fixes to unstable by non-maintainers are also acceptable, but only as a last resort or with permission. Try the following steps first, @@ -1417,7 +1486,7 @@ the release should start with the debian-revision value this, you'll have to invoke dpkg-buildpackage with the -sa switch to force the build system to pick up the new source package (normally it only looks for Debian revisions of '0' or -'1' -- it's not yet clever enough to know about `0.1'). +'1' — it's not yet clever enough to know about `0.1').

Remember, porters who are simply recompiling a package for a different architecture do not need to renumber. Porters should use new version @@ -1455,33 +1524,32 @@ simply requires a recompile (i.e., a new shared library is available to be linked against, a bug was fixed in debhelper), there must still be a changelog entry; therefore, there will be a patch. If you are a porter, you are -probably just doing a binary NMU. (Note: this leaves out in the cold -porters who have to do recompiles -- chalk it up as a weakness in how +probably just doing a binary-only NMU. (Note: this leaves out in the cold +porters who have to do recompiles — chalk it up as a weakness in how we maintain our archive.)

If the source NMU (non-maintainer upload) fixes some existing bugs, -the bugs in the Bug Tracking System which are fixed need to be -notified but not actually closed by the -non-maintainer. Technically, only the official package maintainer or -the original bug submitter are allowed to close bugs. However, the -person making the non-maintainer release must send a short message to -the relevant bugs explaining that the bugs have been fixed by the NMU. -Using control@bugs.debian.org, the party doing the NMU -should also set the severity of the bugs fixed in the NMU to `fixed'. -This 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. Also, open a bug with the patches needed to fix the -problem, or make sure that one of the other (already open) bugs has -the patches. -

-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. +these bugs should be tagged fixed 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 Closes: +bug#nnnnn syntax (see for +more information describing how to close bugs via the changelog). +Tagging the bugs fixed 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. +

+Also, after doing an NMU, you have to open a new bug and include a +patch showing all the changes you have made. 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.

In addition, the normal maintainer should always retain the entry in the changelog file documenting the non-maintainer upload. @@ -1515,8 +1583,9 @@ 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 i386 binary package, there must be a -recompile for each architecture, which is amounts to five more builds. +For instance, for a single i386 binary package, there must be +a recompile for each architecture, which is amounts to +&number-of-arches; more builds. Being Kind to Porters @@ -1525,13 +1594,14 @@ 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 more difficult. +committed by Debian maintainers — common problems which often stymie +porters, and make their jobs unnecessarily difficult.

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). +are). Please be tolerant of succinct or even unclear bug reports, +doing your best to hunt down whatever the problem is.

By far, most of the problems encountered by porters are caused by packaging bugs in the source packages. Here is a checklist @@ -1539,6 +1609,19 @@ of things you should check or be aware of. +Make sure that your Build-Depends and +Build-Depends-Indep settings in debian/control +are set properly. The best way to validate this is to use the +debootstrap package to create an unstable chroot +environment. Within that chrooted environment, install the +build-essential package and any package +dependancies mention in Build-Depends and/or +Build-Depends-Indep. Finally, try building your package +within that chrooted environment. +

+See the for instructions on setting build dependencies. + Don't set architecture to a value other than ``all'' or ``any'' unless you really mean it. In too many cases, maintainers don't follow the instructions in the instead.

-In a binary NMU, no real changes are being made to the source. You do +In a binary-only NMU, no real changes are being made to the source. You do not need to touch any of the files in the source package. This includes debian/changelog.

-Sometimes you need to recompile a package against other packages -which have been updated, such as libraries. You do have to bump the -version number in this case, so that the upgrade system can function -properly. Even so, these are considered binary-only NMUs -- there is -no need in this case for all architectures to recompile. You should -set the version number as in the case of NMU versioning, but add a -``.0.'' before the the NMU version. For instance, a recompile-only -NMU of the source package ``foo_1.3-1'' would be numbered -``foo_1.3-1.0.1''. -

The way to invoke dpkg-buildpackage is as dpkg-buildpackage -B -eporter-email. Of course, set porter-email to your email address. This will do a binary-only build of only the architecture-dependant portions of the package, using the `binary-arch' target in debian/rules. + + Recompilation Binary-Only NMU Versioning +

+Sometimes you need to recompile a package against other packages which +have been updated, such as libraries. You do have to bump the version +number in this case, so that the version comparison system can +function properly. Even so, these are considered binary-only NMUs +— there is no need in this case to trigger all other +architectures to consider themselves out of date or requiring +recompilation. +

+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). +

+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''. + When to do a source NMU if you are a porter @@ -1613,16 +1712,21 @@ Porters doing a source NMU generally follow the guidelines found in 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. Crucial fixes (i.e., changes need to get a source +uploading to. + +

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 +Firstly, the acceptable waiting period &mdash 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, @@ -1762,10 +1866,14 @@ package. When invoked as apt-cache showpkg Removing packages from Incoming

-If you decide to remove a package from Incoming, it is nice -but not required to send a notification of that to the appropriate -announce list (either &email-debian-changes; or -&email-debian-devel-changes;). +In the past, it was possible to remove packages from incoming. +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 +installed in the archive but only the higher version will actually be +available in unstable since the previous version will immediately +be replaced by the higher. However, if you do proper testing of your +packages, the need to replace a package should not occur too often anyway. Replacing or renaming packages

@@ -1787,11 +1895,16 @@ you should set the package maintainer to Debian QA Group against the pseudo package wnpp. The bug report should be titled O: package -- short description indicating that the package is now orphaned. The severity of the bug -should be set to normal. If the package is especially -crucial to Debian, you should instead submit a bug against -wnpp and title it RFA: package -- short -description and set its severity to important. You -should also email &email-debian-devel; asking for a new maintainer. +should be set to normal. 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). +

+If the package is especially crucial to Debian, you should instead submit +a bug against wnpp and title it RFA: package -- +short description and set its severity to +important. Definitely copy the message to debian-devel in this +case, as described above.

Read instructions on the for more information. @@ -1805,7 +1918,7 @@ packages listed in the WNPP, please take a look at the aforementioned page for information and procedures.

It is not OK to simply take over a package that you feel is neglected --- that would be package hijacking. You can, of course, contact the +— that would be package hijacking. You can, of course, contact the current maintainer and ask them if you may take over the package. However, without their assent, you may not take over the package. Even if they ignore you, that is still not grounds to take over a @@ -1822,7 +1935,6 @@ right away. - Handling Bugs Monitoring bugs @@ -1835,16 +1947,16 @@ Maintainers interact with the BTS via email addresses at bugs.debian.org. Documentation on available commands can be found at , or, if you have installed the doc-debian package, you can look at the local files -/usr/doc/debian/bug-*. +&file-bts-docs;.

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: # ask for weekly reports of bugs in my packages -0 17 * * fri echo "index maint maintainer-address" | mail request@bugs.debian.org +&cron-bug-report; -Replace maintainer-address with you official Debian +Replace address with you official Debian maintainer address. Submitting Bugs @@ -1928,7 +2040,7 @@ latest lintian. Reporting lots of bugs at once

Reporting a great number of bugs for the same problem on a great -number of different packages -- i.e., more than 10 -- is a deprecated +number of different packages &mdash i.e., more than 10 &mdash is a deprecated practice. Take all possible steps to avoid submitting bulk bugs at all. For instance, if checking for the problem can be automated, add a new check to lintian so that an error or warning @@ -1947,11 +2059,56 @@ that the bug report is not forwarded to the bug distribution mailing list. + + Interaction with Prospective Developers + +

+This chapter describes procedures that existing Debian developers should +follow when it comes to dealing with wannabe developers. + + Sponsoring packages +

+Sponsoring a package means uploading a package for a maintainer who is not +able to do it on their own, a new maintainer applicant. Sponsoring a package +also means accepting responsibility for it. +

+New maintainers usually have certain difficulties creating Debian packages +— this is quite understandable. That is why the sponsor is there, to check +the package and verify that it is good enough for inclusion in Debian. +(Note that if the sponsored package is new, the FTP admins will also have to +inspect it before letting it in.) +

+Sponsoring merely by signing the upload or just recompiling is +definitely not recommended. You need to build the source +package just like you would build a package of your own. Remember that it +doesn't matter that you left the prospective developer's name both in the +changelog and the control file, the upload can still be traced to you. +

+If you are an application manager for a prospective developer, you can also +be their sponsor. That way you can also verify the how the applicant is +handling the `Tasks and Skills' part of their application. + + Advocating new developers +

+See the page about at the Debian web site. + + Handling new maintainer applications +

+Please see at the Debian web site. + + + Overview of Debian Maintainer Tools

This section contains a rough overview of the tools available to -maintainers. These tools are meant to help convenience developers and -free their time for critical tasks. +maintainers. The following is by no means complete or definitive, but +just a guide to some of the more popular tools. +

+Debian maintainer tools are meant to help convenience developers and +free their time for critical tasks. As Larry Wall says, there's more +than one way to do it.

Some people prefer to use high-level package maintenance tools and some do not. Debian is officially agnostic on this issue; any tool @@ -1962,7 +2119,8 @@ endorse any particular tool to the exclusion of a competing tool.

Most of the descriptions of these packages come from the actual package descriptions themselves. Further information can be found in -the package documentation itself. +the package documentation itself. You can also see more info with the +command apt-cache show package_name. @@ -1990,14 +2148,18 @@ id="upload-checking"> and .

debconf provides a consistent interface to configuring packages interactively. It is user interface -intedependant, allowing end-users to configure packages with a +independant, allowing end-users to configure packages with a text-only interface, an HTML interface, or a dialog interface. New interfaces can be added modularly.

+You can find documentation for this package in the +debconf-doc package. +

Many feel that this system should be used for all packages requiring interactive configuration. debconf is not currently required by Debian Policy, however, that may change in the future. +

@@ -2009,10 +2171,14 @@ building binary Debian packages. Programs are included to install various files into your package, compress files, fix file permissions, integrate your package with the Debian menu system.

-Unlike debmake, debhelper is -broken into several small, granular commands which act in a consistent -manner. As such, it allows a greater granularity of control than -debmake. +Unlike some approaches, debhelper is broken into +several small, granular commands which act in a consistent manner. As +such, it allows a greater granularity of control than some of the +other "debian/rules tools". +

+There are a number of little debhelper add-on +packages, too transient to document. You can see the list of most of +them by doing apt-cache search ^dh-. @@ -2031,16 +2197,18 @@ The consensus is that debmake is now deprecated in favor of debhelper. However, it's not a bug to use debmake. + yada

-yada is a new packaging helper tool with a slightly -different philosophy. It uses a debian/packages file to -auto-generate other necessary files in the debian/ -subdirectory. +yada is another packaging helper tool. It uses a +debian/packages file to auto-generate +debian/rules other necessary files in the +debian/ subdirectory.

-Note that yada is still quite new and possibly not -yet as robust as other systems. +Note that yada is called "essentially unmaintained" +by it's own maintainer, Charles Briscoe-Smith. As such, it can be +considered deprecated. @@ -2077,14 +2245,39 @@ to send mail about the upload of a package. You can configure it for new upload locations or methods. + + dput +

+The dput package and script does much the same +thing as dupload, but in a different way. It has +some features over dupload, such as the ability to +check the GnuPG signature and checksums before uploading, and the +possibility of running dinstall in dry-run mode after the +upload. + + fakeroot

fakeroot simulates root privileges. This enables you to build packages without being root (packages usually want to install files with root ownership). If you have -fakeroot installed, you can say, i.e., -dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot as a user. +fakeroot installed, you can build packages as a +user: dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot. + + + + debootstrap +

+The debootstrap package and script allows you to +"bootstrap" a Debian base system into any part of your filesystem. +By "base system", we mean the bare minimum of packages required to +operate and install the rest of the system. +

+Having a system link this can be useful in many ways. For instance, +you can chroot into it if you want to test your build +depends. Or, you can test how your package behaves when installed +into a bare base system. @@ -2092,10 +2285,10 @@ install files with root ownership). If you have

devscripts is a package containing a few wrappers and tools which you may find helpful for maintaining your Debian -packages. Example scripts include debchange, which will -manipulate your debian/changelog file from the -command-line, and debuild, which is a wrapper around -dpkg-buildpackage. +packages. Example scripts include debchange and +dch, which manipulate your debian/changelog +file from the command-line, and debuild, which is a +wrapper around dpkg-buildpackage. @@ -2103,8 +2296,19 @@ command-line, and debuild, which is a wrapper around

debget is a package containing a convenient script which can be helpful in downloading files from the Debian archive. -You can use it to download source packages, for instance. - +You can use it to download source packages, for instance (although +apt-get source package does pretty much the same +thing). + + +