X-Git-Url: http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/ucgi/~ianmdlvl/git?p=developers-reference.git;a=blobdiff_plain;f=pkgs.dbk;h=873c42c4e7d0678c609153727434f581e58401f8;hp=8dd84be2514106eec429357cc2c60bb691974d4e;hb=192df44824cca867c032346c74c654dfe40974f0;hpb=f5e816ccb9b3f7134c12b82c3388b586e29c7676 diff --git a/pkgs.dbk b/pkgs.dbk index 8dd84be..873c42c 100644 --- a/pkgs.dbk +++ b/pkgs.dbk @@ -21,40 +21,41 @@ pages for more information. Assuming no one else is already working on your prospective package, you must -then submit a bug report ( ) against the +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: +You should set the subject of the bug to ITP: foo -- short description, substituting the name of the new -package for foo. +package for foo. The severity of the bug report must be set to wishlist. Please send a copy to &email-debian-devel; by using the X-Debbugs-CC header (don't use CC:, because that way the message's subject won't indicate the bug number). If you are packaging so many new packages (>10) -that notifying the mailing list in seperate messages is too disruptive, -do send a summary after filing the bugs to the debian-devel list instead. +that notifying the mailing list in separate messages is too disruptive, +send a summary after filing the bugs to the debian-devel list instead. This will inform the other developers about upcoming packages and will allow a review of your description and package name. -Please include a Closes: -bug#nnnnn entry in the changelog of the -new package in order for the bug report to be automatically closed once the new -package is installed in the archive (see ). +Please include a Closes: #nnnnn +entry in the changelog of the new package in order for the bug report to +be automatically closed once the new package is installed in the archive +(see ). If you think your package needs some explanations for the administrators of the -NEW package queue, include them in your changelog, send to ftpmaster@debian.org +NEW package queue, include them in your changelog, send to &email-ftpmaster; a reply to the email you receive as a maintainer after your upload, or reply to the rejection email in case you are already re-uploading. -When closing security bugs include CVE numbers as well as the Closes: #nnnnn. +When closing security bugs include CVE numbers as well as the +Closes: #nnnnn. This is useful for the security team to track vulnerabilities. If an upload is made to fix the bug before the advisory ID is known, it is encouraged to modify the historical changelog entry with the next upload. Even in this case, please @@ -121,28 +122,28 @@ for native packages. The debian/changelog file conforms to a certain structure, with a number of different fields. One field of note, the distribution, is described in . More information about the structure of this file +linkend="distribution"/>. More information about the structure of this file can be found in the Debian Policy section titled debian/changelog. Changelog entries can be used to automatically close Debian bugs when the -package is installed into the archive. See . +package is installed into the archive. See . It is conventional that the changelog entry of a package that contains a new upstream version of the software looks like this: - * new upstream version + * New upstream release. There are tools to help you create entries and finalize the changelog for release — see -and . +and . -See also . +See also . @@ -173,16 +174,16 @@ 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). +lintian to emit errors (they will start with E). For more information on lintian, see . +linkend="lintian"/>. -Optionally run to analyze changes from an older +Optionally run debdiff (see ) to analyze changes from an older version, if one exists. @@ -202,7 +203,7 @@ Remove the package, then reinstall it. Copy the source package in a different directory and try unpacking it and rebuilding it. This tests if the package relies on existing files outside of it, or if it relies on permissions being preserved on the files shipped inside -the .diff.gz file. +the .diff.gz file. @@ -229,12 +230,12 @@ accompanied by another file that contains the changes made by Debian For the native packages, the source package includes a Debian source control -file (.dsc) and the source tarball -(.tar.{gz,bz2,lzma}). A source package of a non-native package +file (.dsc) and the source tarball +(.tar.{gz,bz2,xz}). A source package of a non-native package includes a Debian source control file, the original source tarball -(.orig.tar.{gz,bz2,lzma}) and the Debian changes -(.diff.gz for the source format “1.0” or -.debian.tar.{gz,bz2,lzma} for the source format “3.0 (quilt)”). +(.orig.tar.{gz,bz2,xz}) and the Debian changes +(.diff.gz for the source format “1.0” or +.debian.tar.{gz,bz2,xz} for the source format “3.0 (quilt)”). With source format “1.0”, whether a package is native or not was determined @@ -267,7 +268,7 @@ the archive. Please notice that, in non-native packages, permissions on files that are not -present in the .orig.tar.{gz,bz2} will not be preserved, as diff does not store file +present in the *.orig.tar.{gz,bz2,xz} will not be preserved, as diff does not store file permissions in the patch. However when using source format “3.0 (quilt)”, permissions of files inside the debian directory are preserved since they are stored in a tar archive. @@ -280,7 +281,7 @@ preserved since they are stored in a tar archive. 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 debian/changelog file and places it in the -Distribution field of the .changes file. +Distribution field of the .changes file. There are several possible values for this field: stable, @@ -289,19 +290,19 @@ There are several possible values for this field: stable, unstable. -Actually, there are two other possible distributions: stable-security - and testing-security, but read - for more information on those. +Actually, there are other possible distributions: +codename-security, +but read for more information on those. It is not possible to upload a package into several distributions at the same time.
-Special case: uploads to the <literal>stable</literal> and +<title>Special case: uploads to the <literal>stable</literal> and <literal>oldstable</literal> distributions -Uploading to stable means that the package will transfered +Uploading to stable means that the package will transferred to the proposed-updates-new queue for review by the stable release managers, and if approved will be installed in stable-proposed-updates directory of the Debian archive. @@ -310,8 +311,9 @@ point release. To ensure that your upload will be accepted, you should discuss the changes -with the stable release team before you upload. For that, send a mail to -the &email-debian-release; mailing list, including the patch you want to +with the stable release team before you upload. For that, file a bug against +the release.debian.org pseudo-package +using reportbug, including the patch you want to apply to the package version currently in stable. Always be verbose and detailed in your changelog entries for uploads to the stable distribution. @@ -358,15 +360,15 @@ 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 +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 +Provides or shlibs files), possibly making those other packages uninstallable, is strongly discouraged. Uploads to the oldstable distributions are possible as -long as it hasn't been archived. The same rules as for stable - apply. +long as it hasn't been archived. The same rules as for stable +apply.
@@ -399,14 +401,14 @@ upload may be rejected because the archive maintenance software will parse the changes file and see that not all files have been uploaded. -You may also find the Debian packages or useful when uploading packages. These handy programs help -automate the process of uploading packages into Debian. +You may also find the Debian packages dupload +or dput useful when uploading packages.These +handy programs help automate the process of uploading packages into Debian. For removing packages, please see - and -the Debian package . + and +the Debian package dcut. @@ -416,19 +418,19 @@ the Debian package . It is sometimes useful to upload a package immediately, but to want this package to arrive in the archive only a few days later. For example, -when preparing a Non-maintainer Upload, +when preparing a Non-Maintainer Upload, you might want to give the maintainer a few days to react. An upload to the delayed directory keeps the package in - -the deferred uploads queue". +the deferred uploads queue. When the specified waiting time is over, the package is moved into the regular incoming directory for processing. This is done through automatic uploading to &ftp-upload-host; in upload-directory -DELAYED/[012345678]-day. 0-day is uploaded +DELAYED/X-day +(X between 0 and 15). 0-day is uploaded multiple times per day to &ftp-upload-host;. @@ -441,11 +443,11 @@ parameter to put the package into one of the queues. Security uploads Do NOT upload a package to the security -upload queue (oldstable-security, stable-security -, etc.) without prior authorization from the security team. If the +upload queue (on security-master.debian.org) +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 . +see . @@ -461,7 +463,7 @@ for European developers. Packages can also be uploaded via ssh to &ssh-upload-host;; files should be put /srv/upload.debian.org/UploadQueue. This queue does -not support delayed uploads. +not support delayed uploads. @@ -470,11 +472,11 @@ not support delayed uploads. The Debian archive maintainers are responsible for handling package uploads. For the most part, uploads are automatically handled on a daily basis by the -archive maintenance tools, katie. Specifically, updates to -existing packages to the unstable distribution are handled -automatically. In other cases, notably new packages, placing the uploaded -package into the distribution is handled manually. When uploads are handled -manually, the change to the archive may take up to a month to occur. Please +archive maintenance tools, dak process-upload. Specifically, +updates to existing packages to the unstable distribution are +handled automatically. In other cases, notably new packages, placing the +uploaded package into the distribution is handled manually. When uploads are +handled manually, the change to the archive may take some time to occur. Please be patient. @@ -536,7 +538,7 @@ url="&url-bts-devel;#maintincorrect">. Note that the Section field describes both the section as well as the subsection, which are described in . If the section is main, it should be omitted. +linkend="archive-sections"/>. If the section is main, it should be omitted. The list of allowable subsections can be found in . @@ -547,7 +549,7 @@ url="&url-debian-policy;ch-archive.html#s-subsections">. Every developer has to be able to work with the Debian bug tracking system. This includes -knowing how to file bug reports properly (see ), +knowing how to file bug reports properly (see ), how to update them and reorder them, and how to process and close them. @@ -600,11 +602,11 @@ address. When responding to bugs, make sure that any discussion you have about bugs is sent both to the original submitter of the bug, and to the bug itself (e.g., -123@&bugs-host;). If you're writing a new mail and you +123@&bugs-host;). If you're writing a new mail and you don't remember the submitter email address, you can use the -123-submitter@&bugs-host; email to contact the submitter +123-submitter@&bugs-host; email to contact the submitter and to record your mail within the bug log (that means you -don't need to send a copy of the mail to 123@&bugs-host;). +don't need to send a copy of the mail to 123@&bugs-host;). If you get a bug which mentions FTBFS, this means Fails to build from source. @@ -613,9 +615,9 @@ Porters frequently use this acronym. Once you've dealt with a bug report (e.g. fixed it), mark it as done (close it) by sending an explanation message to -123-done@&bugs-host;. If you're fixing a bug by changing +123-done@&bugs-host;. If you're fixing a bug by changing and uploading the package, you can automate bug closing as described in . +linkend="upload-bugfix"/>. You should never close bugs via the bug server @@ -678,7 +680,7 @@ the right package. If you don't know which package it should be reassigned to, you should ask for help on IRC or on &email-debian-devel;. Please inform the maintainer(s) of the package you reassign the bug to, for example by Cc:ing the message that does the -reassign to packagename@packages.debian.org and explaining +reassign to packagename@packages.debian.org and explaining your reasons in that mail. Please note that a simple reassignment is not e-mailed to the maintainers of the package being reassigned to, so they won't know about it until they look at @@ -740,7 +742,7 @@ bug as patch. 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 pending to let +the VCS repository, you may tag the bug as pending to let people know that the bug is corrected and that it will be closed with the next upload (add the closes: in the changelog). This is particularly useful if you are @@ -792,13 +794,13 @@ closing changelogs are identified: We prefer the closes: #XXX syntax, as it is the most concise entry and the easiest to integrate with the text of the changelog. Unless specified different by the --v-switch to dpkg-buildpackage, +-v-switch to dpkg-buildpackage, only the bugs closed in the most recent changelog entry are closed (basically, exactly the bugs mentioned in the changelog-part in the .changes file are closed). -Historically, uploads identified as Non-maintainer +Historically, uploads identified as non-maintainer upload (NMU) were tagged fixed instead of being closed, but that practice was ceased with the advent of version-tracking. The same applied to the tag fixed-in-experimental. @@ -810,8 +812,8 @@ bugs, send a reopen XXX 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 .changes file to -XXX-done@&bugs-host;, where XXX -is the bug number, and put Version: YYY and an empty line as the first two +XXX-done@&bugs-host;, where XXX +is the bug number, and put Version: YYY and an empty line as the first two lines of the body of the email, where YYY is the first version where the bug has been fixed. @@ -819,13 +821,13 @@ first version where the bug has been fixed. Bear in mind that it is not obligatory to close bugs using the changelog as described above. If you simply want to close bugs that don't have anything to do with an upload you made, do it by emailing an explanation to -XXX-done@&bugs-host;. Do XXX-done@&bugs-host;. Do not close bugs in the changelog entry of a version if the changes in that version of the package don't have any bearing on the bug. For general information on how to write your changelog entries, see . +linkend="bpp-debian-changelog"/>. @@ -841,16 +843,23 @@ fixing them themselves, sending security advisories, and maintaining 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. DO NOT UPLOAD any packages for stable -without contacting the team. Useful information includes, for example: +and promptly contact the security team by emailing &email-security-team;. If +desired, email can be encrypted with the Debian Security Contact key, see + for details. +DO NOT UPLOAD any packages for +stable without contacting the team. Useful information +includes, for example: +Whether or not the bug is already public. + + + + Which versions of the package are known to be affected by the bug. Check each -version that is present in a supported Debian release, as well as +version that is present in a supported Debian release, as well as testing and unstable. @@ -862,7 +871,7 @@ The nature of the fix, if any is available (patches are especially helpful) Any fixed packages that you have prepared yourself (send only the -.diff.gz and .dsc files and read .diff.gz and .dsc files and read first) @@ -875,7 +884,7 @@ testing, etc.) Any information needed for the advisory (see ) +linkend="bug-security-advisories"/>) @@ -888,7 +897,7 @@ below on how to prepare packages for the Security Team to handle. The Security Tracker The security team maintains a central database, the -Debian Security Tracker. +Debian Security Tracker. This contains all public information that is known about security issues: which packages and versions are affected or fixed, and thus whether stable, testing and/or unstable are vulnerable. Information that is still confidential @@ -960,9 +969,9 @@ release of Debian. When sending confidential information to the security team, be sure to mention this fact. -Please note that if secrecy is needed you may not upload a fix to +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 +anywhere else, such as a public VCS 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. @@ -973,7 +982,7 @@ has become public. The Security Team has a PGP-key to enable encrypted communication about -sensitive issues. See the Security Team FAQ for details. +sensitive issues. See the Security Team FAQ for details. @@ -1103,7 +1112,7 @@ the previous version repeatedly (interdiff from the patchutils package and debdiff from devscripts are useful tools for this, see ). +linkend="debdiff"/>). Be sure to verify the following items: @@ -1112,11 +1121,10 @@ Be sure to verify the following items: Target the right distribution -in your debian/changelog. -For stable this is stable-security and -for testing this is testing-security, and for the previous -stable release, this is oldstable-security. Do not target -distribution-proposed-updates or +in your debian/changelog: +codename-security +(e.g. wheezy-security). +Do not target distribution-proposed-updates or stable! @@ -1138,31 +1146,33 @@ process. The identifier can be cross-referenced later. -Make sure the version number is proper. +Make sure the version number is proper. It must be greater than the current package, but less than package versions in later distributions. If in doubt, test it with dpkg --compare-versions. Be careful not to re-use a version number that you have already used for a previous upload, or one that conflicts with a binNMU. The convention is to append -+codename1, e.g. -1:2.4.3-4+etch1, of course increasing 1 for any subsequent ++debXu1 (where +X is the major release number), e.g. +1:2.4.3-4+deb7u1, of course increasing 1 for any subsequent uploads. -Unless the upstream source has been uploaded to security.debian.org - before (by a previous security update), build the upload with full upstream source (dpkg-buildpackage --sa). If there has been a previous upload to -security.debian.org with the same upstream version, you may -upload without upstream source ( dpkg-buildpackage -sd). +Unless the upstream source has been uploaded to +security.debian.org before (by a previous security update), +build the upload with full upstream source +(dpkg-buildpackage -sa). If there has been a previous +upload to security.debian.org with the same upstream +version, you may upload without upstream source (dpkg-buildpackage +-sd). Be sure to use the exact same -*.orig.tar.{gz,bz2} as used in the +*.orig.tar.{gz,bz2,xz} as used in the normal archive, otherwise it is not possible to move the security fix into the main archives later. @@ -1172,8 +1182,8 @@ main archives later. 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 - ) or setup a chroot (see - and ). +) or setup a chroot (see + and ). @@ -1183,14 +1193,14 @@ have such a system yourself, you can use a debian.org machine (see Uploading the fixed package Do NOT upload a package to the security -upload queue (oldstable-security, stable-security -, etc.) without prior authorization from the security team. If the -package does not exactly meet the team's requirements, it will cause many +upload queue (on security-master.debian.org) +without prior authorization from the security team. If the +package does not exactly meet the team's requirements, it will cause many problems and delays in dealing with the unwanted upload. -Do NOT upload your fix to -proposed-updates without coordinating with the security team. +Do NOT upload your fix to +proposed-updates without coordinating with the security team. Packages from security.debian.org will be copied into the proposed-updates directory automatically. If a package with the same or a higher version number is already installed into the archive, @@ -1202,7 +1212,7 @@ instead. 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 -ftp://security-master.debian.org/pub/SecurityUploadQueue/ . +ftp://security-master.debian.org/pub/SecurityUploadQueue/. Once an upload to the security queue has been accepted, the package will @@ -1227,7 +1237,7 @@ on &ftp-master-host;.
-Moving, removing, renaming, adopting, and orphaning packages +Moving, removing, renaming, orphaning, adopting, and reintroducing packages Some archive manipulation operations are not automated in the Debian upload process. These procedures should be manually followed by maintainers. This @@ -1237,7 +1247,7 @@ chapter gives guidelines on what to do in these cases. Moving packages 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 +non-free section might be GPL'd in a later version, in which case the package should be moved to `main' or `contrib'. See the Debian Policy Manual for guidelines on what section a package belongs in. @@ -1248,7 +1258,7 @@ control information to place the package in the desired section, and re-upload the package (see the Debian Policy Manual for details). You must ensure that you include the -.orig.tar.{gz,bz2} in your upload (even if you are not uploading +.orig.tar.{gz,bz2,xz} in your upload (even if you are not uploading a new upstream version), or it will not appear in the new section together with the rest of the package. If your new section is valid, it will be moved automatically. If it does not, then contact the ftpmasters in order to @@ -1259,7 +1269,7 @@ If, on the other hand, you need to change the subsection of one of your packages (e.g., ``devel'', ``admin''), the procedure is slightly different. Correct the subsection as found in the control file of the package, and re-upload that. Also, you'll need to get the override file updated, as -described in . +described in .
@@ -1268,18 +1278,18 @@ described in . If for some reason you want to completely remove a package (say, if it is an old compatibility library which is no longer required), you need to file a bug -against ftp.debian.org asking that the package be removed; +against &ftp-debian-org; asking that the package be removed; as all bugs, this bug should normally have normal severity. -The bug title should be in the form RM: package - [architecture list] -- +The bug title should be in the form RM: package +[architecture list] -- reason, where package is the package to be removed and reason is a -short summary of the reason for the removal request. +short summary of the reason for the removal request. [architecture list] is optional and only needed if the removal request only applies to some architectures, not all. Note that the reportbug will create a title conforming -to these rules when you use it to report a bug against the -ftp.debian.org pseudo-package. +to these rules when you use it to report a bug against the +&ftp-debian-org; pseudo-package. @@ -1292,21 +1302,24 @@ pending removal requests. -Note that removals can only be done for the unstable -, experimental and stable - distribution. Packages are not removed from +Note that removals can only be done for the unstable, +experimental and stable +distribution. Packages are not removed from testing directly. Rather, they will be removed automatically after the package has been removed from -unstable and no package in testing - depends on it. +unstable and no package in +testing depends on it. (Removals from +testing are possible though by filing a removal bug report +against the &release-debian-org; +pseudo-package. See the section .) There is one exception when an explicit removal request is not necessary: If a -(source or binary) package is an orphan, it will be removed semi-automatically. -For a binary-package, this means if there is no longer any source package -producing this binary package; if the binary package is just no longer produced -on some architectures, a removal request is still necessary. For a -source-package, this means that all binary packages it refers to have been +(source or binary) package is no longer built from source, it will be removed +semi-automatically. For a binary-package, this means if there is no longer any +source package producing this binary package; if the binary package is just no +longer produced on some architectures, a removal request is still necessary. For +a source-package, this means that all binary packages it refers to have been taken over by another source package. @@ -1337,7 +1350,7 @@ the apt-cache program from the apt package. When invoked as apt-cache showpkg package, the program will show details for package, including reverse depends. -Other useful programs include apt-cache rdepends, +Other useful programs include apt-cache rdepends, apt-rdepends, build-rdeps (in the devscripts package) and grep-dctrl. Removal of @@ -1379,13 +1392,13 @@ rename their software (or you made a mistake naming your package), you should follow a two-step process to rename it. In the first step, change the debian/control file to reflect the new name and to replace, provide and conflict with the -obsolete package name (see the -Debian Policy Manual for details). Please note that you +obsolete package name (see the Debian +Policy Manual for details). Please note that you should only add a Provides relation if all packages depending on the obsolete package name continue to work after the renaming. Once you've uploaded the package and the package -has moved into the archive, file a bug against -ftp.debian.org asking to remove the package with the +has moved into the archive, file a bug against &ftp-debian-org; +asking to remove the package with the obsolete name (see ). Do not forget to properly reassign the package's bugs at the same time. @@ -1448,7 +1461,7 @@ 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 current maintainer and ask them if you may take over the package. If you have reason to believe a -maintainer has gone AWOL (absent without leave), see . +maintainer has gone AWOL (absent without leave), see . Generally, you may not take over the package without the assent of the current @@ -1464,7 +1477,7 @@ more information). If you take over an old package, you probably want to be listed as the package's official maintainer in the bug system. This will happen automatically once you upload a new version with an updated -Maintainer: field, although it can take a few hours after +Maintainer field, although it can take a few hours after the upload is done. If you do not expect to upload a new version for a while, you can use to get the bug reports. However, make sure that the old maintainer has no problem with the fact that @@ -1472,6 +1485,55 @@ they will continue to receive the bugs during that time. +
+Reintroducing packages + +Packages are often removed due to release-critical bugs, absent maintainers, +too few users or poor quality in general. While the process of reintroduction +is similar to the initial packaging process, you can avoid some pitfalls by +doing some historical research first. + + +You should check why the package was removed in the first place. This +information can be found in the removal item in the news section of the PTS +page for the package or by browsing the log of +removals. +The removal bug will tell you why the package was removed and will give some +indication of what you will need to work on in order to reintroduce the package. +It may indicate that the best way forward is to switch to some other piece of +software instead of reintroducing the package. + + +It may be appropriate to contact the former maintainers to find out if +they are working on reintroducing the package, interested in co-maintaining +the package or interested in sponsoring the package if needed. + + +You should do all the things required before introducing new packages +(). + + +You should base your work on the latest packaging available that is suitable. +That might be the latest version from unstable, which will +still be present in the snapshot archive. + + +The version control system used by the previous maintainer might contain useful +changes, so it might be a good idea to have a look there. Check if the control +file of the previous package contained any headers linking to the version +control system for the package and if it still exists. + + +Package removals from unstable (not testing, +stable or oldstable) trigger the +closing of all bugs related to the package. You should look through all the +closed bugs (including archived bugs) and unarchive and reopen any that were +closed in a version ending in +rm and still apply. Any that +no longer apply should be marked as fixed in the correct version if that is +known. + +
+
@@ -1487,8 +1549,8 @@ Porting is the act of building Debian packages for architectures that are different from the original architecture of the package maintainer's binary package. It is a unique and essential activity. In fact, porters do most of the actual compiling of Debian packages. For instance, when a maintainer -uploads a (portable) source packages with binaries for the i386 - architecture, it will be built for each of the other architectures, +uploads a (portable) source packages with binaries for the i386 +architecture, it will be built for each of the other architectures, amounting to &number-of-arches; more builds.
@@ -1521,18 +1583,18 @@ Make sure that your Build-Depends and debian/control are set properly. The best way to validate this is to use the debootstrap package to create an unstable chroot environment (see ). +linkend="debootstrap"/>). Within that chrooted environment, install the build-essential package and any package dependencies mentioned in Build-Depends and/or Build-Depends-Indep. Finally, try building your package within that chrooted environment. These steps can be automated by the use of the pbuilder program which is provided by the package of the -same name (see ). +same name (see ). If you can't set up a proper chroot, dpkg-depcheck may be of -assistance (see ). +assistance (see ). See the Debian Policy @@ -1541,9 +1603,9 @@ Manual for instructions on setting build dependencies. -Don't set architecture to a value other than all or +Don't set architecture to a value other than all or any unless you really mean it. In too many cases, -maintainers don't follow the instructions in the Debian Policy Manual. Setting your architecture to only one architecture (such as i386 or amd64) is usually incorrect. @@ -1592,8 +1654,8 @@ standardize on different compilers. -Make sure your debian/rules contains separate binary-arch -and binary-indep targets, as the Debian Policy Manual +Make sure your debian/rules contains separate binary-arch +and binary-indep targets, as the Debian Policy Manual requires. Make sure that both targets work independently, that is, that you can call the target without having called the other before. To test this, try to run dpkg-buildpackage -B. @@ -1623,8 +1685,8 @@ The way to invoke dpkg-buildpackage is as -mporter-email. Of course, set porter-email to your email address. This will do a binary-only build of only the architecture-dependent portions of the package, -using the binary-arch target in debian/rules -. +using the binary-arch target in +debian/rules. If you are working on a Debian machine for your porting efforts and you need to @@ -1638,7 +1700,7 @@ it signed conveniently, or use the remote signing mode of 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 +bad compiler, etc.). 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 (dak refuses to install new packages if they don't have a @@ -1648,8 +1710,7 @@ version number greater than the currently available one). You have to make sure that your binary-only NMU doesn't render the package uninstallable. This could happen when a source package generates arch-dependent and arch-independent packages that have inter-dependencies -generated using dpkg's substitution variable $(Source-Version) -. +generated using dpkg's substitution variable $(Source-Version). Despite the required modification of the changelog, these are called @@ -1665,14 +1726,14 @@ source code). The ``magic'' for a recompilation-only NMU is triggered by using a suffix -appended to the package version number, following the form -bnumber. +appended to the package version number, following the form +bnumber. For instance, if the latest version you are recompiling against was version -2.9-3, your binary-only NMU should carry a version of -2.9-3+b1. If the latest version was 3.4+b1 - (i.e, a native package with a previous recompilation NMU), your -binary-only NMU should have a version number of 3.4+b2. - In the past, such NMUs used the third-level number on the +2.9-3, your binary-only NMU should carry a version of +2.9-3+b1. If the latest version was 3.4+b1 +(i.e, a native package with a previous recompilation NMU), your +binary-only NMU should have a version number of 3.4+b2. +In the past, such NMUs used the third-level number on the Debian part of the revision to denote their recompilation-only status; however, this syntax was ambiguous with native packages and did not allow proper ordering of recompile-only NMUs, source NMUs, and security NMUs on @@ -1690,7 +1751,7 @@ to only build the architecture-dependent parts of the package. When to do a source NMU if you are a porter Porters doing a source NMU generally follow the guidelines found in , just like non-porters. However, it is expected that the wait +linkend="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. It also varies whether @@ -1698,7 +1759,7 @@ the architecture is a candidate for inclusion into the next stable release; the release managers decide and announce which architectures are candidates. -If you are a porter doing an NMU for unstable, the above +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 @@ -1706,13 +1767,13 @@ on the unstable distribution. This period can be shortened if the problem is critical and imposes hardship on the porting effort, at the discretion of the porter group. (Remember, none of this is Policy, just mutually agreed upon guidelines.) For uploads to stable or -testing , please coordinate with the appropriate release +testing, please coordinate with the appropriate release team first. Secondly, porters doing source NMUs should make sure that the bug they submit to the BTS should be of severity serious or greater. This -ensures that a single source package can be used to compile every supported +ensures that a single source package can be used to compile every supported Debian architecture by release time. It is very important that we have one version of the binary and source package for all architectures in order to comply with many licenses. @@ -1760,7 +1821,7 @@ with the porters. Porter tools Descriptions of several porting tools can be found in . +linkend="tools-porting"/>.
@@ -1769,23 +1830,23 @@ linkend="tools-porting"/> . The wanna-build system is used as a distributed, client-server build distribution system. It is usually used in -conjunction with build daemons running the buildd - program. Build daemons are ``slave'' hosts -which contact the central wanna-build +conjunction with build daemons running the buildd +program. Build daemons are ``slave'' hosts +which contact the central wanna-build system to receive a list of packages that need to be built. wanna-build is not yet available as a package; however, all Debian porting efforts are using it for automated package building. The tool used to do the actual package builds, sbuild is available as a package, see its -description in . Please note that the packaged +role="package">sbuild is available as a package, see its +description in . Please note that the packaged version is not the same as the one used on build daemons, but it is close -enough to reproduce problems. +enough to reproduce problems. -Most of the data produced by wanna-build - which is generally useful to porters is available on the +Most of the data produced by wanna-build +which is generally useful to porters is available on the web at . This data includes nightly updated statistics, queueing information and logs for build attempts. @@ -1845,25 +1906,53 @@ fail also, and indicate this to a human reader without actually trying. In order to prevent autobuilders from needlessly trying to build your package, -it must be included in packages-arch-specific, a list used +it must be included in Packages-arch-specific, a list used by the wanna-build script. The current version is available -as ; +as ; please see the top of the file for whom to contact for changes. Please note that it is insufficient to only add your package to -Packages-arch-specific without making it fail to build on unsupported +Packages-arch-specific without making it fail to build on unsupported architectures: A porter or any other person trying to build your package might accidently upload it without noticing it doesn't work. If in the past some binary packages were uploaded on unsupported architectures, request their removal by filing a bug against ftp.debian.org +role="package">ftp.debian.org.
+
+Marking non-free packages as auto-buildable + +By default packages from the non-free section are not built by the autobuilder +network (mostly because the license of the packages could disapprove). +To enable a package to be build you need to perform the following +steps: + + + + +Check whether it is legally allowed and technically possible +to auto-build the package; + + + + +Add XS-Autobuild: yes into the header part +of debian/control; + + + + +Send an email to &email-nonfree-release; and explain why the +package can legitimately and technically be auto-built. + + + +
@@ -1917,11 +2006,11 @@ maintainer by other means (private email, IRC). If the maintainer is usually active and responsive, have you tried to contact -him? In general it should be considered preferable that a maintainer takes care -of an issue himself and that he is given the chance to review and correct your -patch, because he can be expected to be more aware of potential issues which an -NMUer might miss. It is often a better use of everyone's time if the maintainer -is given an opportunity to upload a fix on their own. +them? In general it should be considered preferable that maintainers take care +of an issue themselves and that they are given the chance to review and +correct your patch, because they can be expected to be more aware of potential +issues which an NMUer might miss. It is often a better use of everyone's time +if the maintainer is given an opportunity to upload a fix on their own. @@ -1929,16 +2018,16 @@ is given an opportunity to upload a fix on their own. When doing an NMU, you must first make sure that your intention to NMU is clear. Then, you must send a patch with the differences between the current package and your proposed NMU to the BTS. The -nmudiff script in the devscripts package +nmudiff script in the devscripts package might be helpful. While preparing the patch, you should better be aware of any package-specific -practices that the maintainer might be using. Taking them into account reduces -the burden of getting your changes integrated back in the normal package -workflow and thus increases the possibilities that that will happen. A good +practices that the maintainer might be using. Taking them into account +reduces the burden of integrating your changes into the normal package +workflow and thus increases the chances that integration will happen. A good place where to look for for possible package-specific practices is -debian/README.source. +debian/README.source. Unless you have an excellent reason not to do so, you must then give some time @@ -1948,6 +2037,11 @@ to the maintainer to react (for example, by uploading to the +Upload fixing only release-critical bugs older than 7 days, with no maintainer activity on the bug for 7 days and no indication that a fix is in progress: 0 days + + + + Upload fixing only release-critical bugs older than 7 days: 2 days @@ -1996,10 +2090,10 @@ defend the wisdom of any NMU you perform on its own merits.
-NMUs and debian/changelog +NMUs and <filename>debian/changelog</filename> Just like any other (source) upload, NMUs must add an entry to -debian/changelog, telling what has changed with this +debian/changelog, telling what has changed with this upload. The first line of this entry must explicitely mention that this upload is an NMU, e.g.: @@ -2010,7 +2104,7 @@ upload. The first line of this entry must explicitely mention that this upload The way to version NMUs differs for native and non-native packages. -If the package is a native package (without a debian revision in the version number), +If the package is a native package (without a Debian revision in the version number), the version must be the version of the last maintainer upload, plus +nmuX, where X is a counter starting at 1. @@ -2020,19 +2114,19 @@ if the current version is 1.5, then an NMU would get version 1.5+nmu1. -If the package is a not a native package, you should add a minor version number -to the debian revision part of the version number (the portion after the last -hyphen). This extra number must start at 1. For example, +If the package is not a native package, you should add a minor version number +to the Debian revision part of the version number (the portion after the last +hyphen). This extra number must start at 1. For example, if the current version is 1.5-2, then an NMU would get version 1.5-2.1. If a new upstream version -is packaged in the NMU, the debian revision is set to 0, for +is packaged in the NMU, the Debian revision is set to 0, for example 1.6-0.1. In both cases, if the last upload was also an NMU, the counter should be increased. For example, if the current version is 1.5+nmu3 (a native package which has already been -NMUed), the NMU would get version 1.5+nmu4. . +NMUed), the NMU would get version 1.5+nmu4. A special versioning scheme is needed to avoid disrupting the maintainer's @@ -2043,26 +2137,17 @@ It also has the benefit of making it visually clear that a package in the archive was not made by the official maintainer. - If you upload a package to testing or stable, you sometimes need to "fork" the version number tree. This is the case for security uploads, for example. For this, a version of the form -+debXYuZ -should be used, where X and -Y are the major and minor release numbers, and -Z is a counter starting at 1. -When the release number is not yet known (often the case for -testing, at the beginning of release cycles), the lowest -release number higher than the last stable release number must be used. For -example, while Etch (Debian 4.0) is stable, a security NMU to stable for a -package at version 1.5-3 would have version -1.5-3+deb40u1, whereas a security NMU to Lenny would get -version 1.5-3+deb50u1. After the release of Lenny, security -uploads to the testing distribution will be versioned -+deb51uZ, until it is known whether that release will be -Debian 5.1 or Debian 6.0 (if that becomes the case, uploads will be versioned -as +deb60uZ. ++debXuY +should be used, where X is the major release number, +and Y is a counter starting at 1. +For example, while Wheezy (Debian 7.0) is stable, a security NMU to stable for +a package at version 1.5-3 would have version +1.5-3+deb7u1, whereas a security NMU to Jessie would get +version 1.5-3+deb8u1.
@@ -2078,7 +2163,7 @@ allows the developer doing the NMU to perform all the necessary tasks at the same time. For instance, instead of telling the maintainer that you will upload the updated package in 7 days, you should upload the package to -DELAYED/7 and tell the maintainer that he has 7 days to +DELAYED/7 and tell the maintainer that they have 7 days to react. During this time, the maintainer can ask you to delay the upload some more, or cancel your upload. @@ -2087,12 +2172,12 @@ more, or cancel your upload. The DELAYED queue should not be used to put additional pressure on the maintainer. In particular, it's important that you are available to cancel or delay the upload before the delay expires since the -maintainer cannot cancel the upload himself. +maintainer cannot cancel the upload themselves. If you make an NMU to DELAYED and the maintainer updates -his package before the delay expires, your upload will be rejected because a +the package before the delay expires, your upload will be rejected because a newer version is already available in the archive. Ideally, the maintainer will take care to include your proposed changes (or at least a solution for the problems they address) in that upload. @@ -2139,7 +2224,7 @@ package is used. BinNMUs are usually triggered on the buildds by wanna-build. -An entry is added to debian/changelog, +An entry is added to debian/changelog, explaining why the upload was needed and increasing the version number as described in . This entry should not be included in the next upload. @@ -2148,7 +2233,7 @@ This entry should not be included in the next upload. Buildds upload packages for their architecture to the archive as binary-only uploads. Strictly speaking, these are binNMUs. However, they are not normally -called NMU, and they don't add an entry to debian/changelog. +called NMU, and they don't add an entry to debian/changelog. @@ -2166,8 +2251,8 @@ uploads are uploads of orphaned packages. QA uploads are very much like normal maintainer uploads: they may fix anything, even minor issues; the version numbering is normal, and there is no need to use -a delayed upload. The difference is that you are not listed as the Maintainer -or Uploader for the package. Also, the changelog entry of a QA upload has a +a delayed upload. The difference is that you are not listed as the Maintainer +or Uploader for the package. Also, the changelog entry of a QA upload has a special first line: @@ -2195,6 +2280,25 @@ the new version (see ). +
+NMUs vs team uploads + + +Sometimes you are fixing and/or updating a package because you are member of a +packaging team (which uses a mailing list as Maintainer or Uploader, see ) but you don't want to add yourself to Uploaders +because you do not plan to contribute regularly to this specific package. If it +conforms with your team's policy, you can perform a normal upload without +being listed directly as Maintainer or Uploader. In that case, you should +start your changelog entry with the following line: + + + + * Team upload. + + +
+
@@ -2204,7 +2308,7 @@ 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 times. It is strongly recommended that packages with a priority of -Standard or which are part of the base set have +standard or which are part of the base set have co-maintainers. @@ -2224,8 +2328,8 @@ easy: 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 CVS or Subversion. Alioth (see - ) provides such tools, amongst others. +such as CVS or Subversion. Alioth (see +) provides such tools, amongst others. @@ -2240,7 +2344,7 @@ Uploaders: John Buzz <jbuzz@debian.org>, Adam Rex <arex@debian.org> -Using the PTS ( ), the co-maintainers +Using the PTS (), the co-maintainers should subscribe themselves to the appropriate source package. @@ -2248,32 +2352,38 @@ should subscribe themselves to the appropriate source package. Another form of collaborative maintenance is team maintenance, which is recommended if you maintain several packages with the same group of developers. -In that case, the Maintainer and Uploaders field of each package must be +In that case, the Maintainer and Uploaders field of each package must be managed with care. It is recommended to choose between one of the two following schemes: -Put the team member mainly responsible for the package in the Maintainer field. -In the Uploaders, put the mailing list address, and the team members who care +Put the team member mainly responsible for the package in the Maintainer field. +In the Uploaders, put the mailing list address, and the team members who care for the package. -Put the mailing list address in the Maintainer field. In the Uploaders field, +Put the mailing list address in the Maintainer field. In the Uploaders field, put the team members who care for the package. In this case, you must make sure the mailing list accept bug reports without any human interaction (like moderation for non-subscribers). + In any case, it is a bad idea to automatically put all team members in the -Uploaders field. It clutters the Developer's Package Overview listing (see - ) with packages one doesn't really care for, and creates -a false sense of good maintenance. +Uploaders field. It clutters the Developer's Package Overview listing (see +) with packages one doesn't really care for, and creates +a false sense of good maintenance. For the same reason, team members do +not need to add themselves to the Uploaders field just because they are +uploading the package once, they can do a “Team upload” (see ). Conversely, it is a bad idea to keep a +package with only the mailing list address as a Maintainer and no +Uploaders.
@@ -2289,8 +2399,8 @@ after they have undergone some degree of testing in They must be in sync on all architectures and mustn't have dependencies that make them uninstallable; they also have to have generally no known -release-critical bugs at the time they're installed into testing -. This way, testing should always be close to +release-critical bugs at the time they're installed into testing. +This way, testing should always be close to being a release candidate. Please see below for details. @@ -2315,22 +2425,20 @@ the following: The package must have been available in unstable for 2, 5 or 10 days, depending on the urgency (high, medium or low). Please note that the urgency is sticky, meaning that the highest urgency uploaded since the -previous testing transition is taken into account. Those -delays may be doubled during a freeze, or testing -transitions may be switched off altogether; +previous testing transition is taken into account; It must not have new release-critical bugs (RC bugs affecting the version -available in unstable, but not affecting the version in +available in unstable, but not affecting the version in testing); It must be available on all architectures on which it has previously been built -in unstable. may be of interest +in unstable. dak ls may be of interest to check that information; @@ -2348,6 +2456,12 @@ The packages on which it depends must either be available in all the necessary criteria); + + +The phase of the project. I.e. automatic transitions are turned off during +the freeze of the testing distribution. + + To find out whether a package is progressing into testing @@ -2369,7 +2483,7 @@ more information about the usual problems which may be causing such troubles. Sometimes, some packages never enter testing because the -set of inter-relationship is too complicated and cannot be sorted out by the +set of interrelationship is too complicated and cannot be sorted out by the scripts. See below for details. @@ -2378,14 +2492,14 @@ url="http://release.debian.org/migration/"> — but be warned, this page shows build dependencies which are not considered by britney.
-out-of-date +Out-of-date For the testing migration script, outdated means: There are different versions in unstable for the release architectures (except for the architectures in fuckedarches; fuckedarches is a list of architectures that don't keep up (in update_out.py), but -currently, it's empty). outdated has nothing whatsoever to do with the +currently, it's empty). outdated has nothing whatsoever to do with the architectures this package has in testing. @@ -2415,10 +2529,10 @@ Consider this example: -The package is out of date on alpha in unstable, and will +The package is out of date on alpha in unstable, and will not go to testing. Removing the package would not help at all, the -package is still out of date on alpha, and will not -propagate to testing. +package is still out of date on alpha, and will not +propagate to testing. However, if ftp-master removes a package in unstable (here @@ -2452,7 +2566,7 @@ on arm): In this case, the package is up to date on all release architectures in -unstable (and the extra hurd-i386 +unstable (and the extra hurd-i386 doesn't matter, as it's not a release architecture). @@ -2472,8 +2586,8 @@ with the new version of b; then a may be removed to allow b in. -Of course, there is another reason to remove a package from testing -: It's just too buggy (and having a single RC-bug is enough to be +Of course, there is another reason to remove a package from testing: +It's just too buggy (and having a single RC-bug is enough to be in this state). @@ -2484,7 +2598,7 @@ will automatically be removed.
-circular dependencies +Circular dependencies A situation which is not handled very well by britney is if package a depends on the new version of package @@ -2528,28 +2642,28 @@ happens to one of your packages.
-influence of package in testing +Influence of package in testing -Generally, there is nothing that the status of a package in testing - means for transition of the next version from unstable - to testing, with two exceptions: +Generally, there is nothing that the status of a package in testing +means for transition of the next version from unstable +to testing, with two exceptions: If the RC-bugginess of the package goes down, it may go in even if it is still -RC-buggy. The second exception is if the version of the package in -testing is out of sync on the different arches: Then any arch might +RC-buggy. The second exception is if the version of the package in +testing is out of sync on the different arches: Then any arch might just upgrade to the version of the source package; however, this can happen only if the package was previously forced through, the arch is in fuckedarches, -or there was no binary package of that arch present in unstable - at all during the testing migration. +or there was no binary package of that arch present in unstable +at all during the testing migration. -In summary this means: The only influence that a package being in -testing has on a new version of the same package is that the new +In summary this means: The only influence that a package being in +testing has on a new version of the same package is that the new version might go in easier.
-details +Details If you are interested in details, this is how britney works: @@ -2557,14 +2671,12 @@ If you are interested in details, this is how britney works: The packages are looked at to determine whether they are valid candidates. This gives the update excuses. The most common reasons why a package is not considered are too young, RC-bugginess, and out of date on some arches. For -this part of britney, the release managers have hammers of various sizes to -force britney to consider a package. (Also, the base freeze is coded in that -part of britney.) (There is a similar thing for binary-only updates, but this -is not described here. If you're interested in that, please peruse the code.) +this part of britney, the release managers have hammers of various sizes, +called hints (see below), to force britney to consider a package. -Now, the more complex part happens: Britney tries to update testing - with the valid candidates. For that, britney tries to add each +Now, the more complex part happens: Britney tries to update testing +with the valid candidates. For that, britney tries to add each valid candidate to the testing distribution. If the number of uninstallable packages in testing doesn't increase, the package is accepted. From that point on, the accepted package is considered to be part @@ -2573,15 +2685,18 @@ tests include this package. Hints from the release team are processed before or after this main run, depending on the exact type. -If you want to see more details, you can look it up on -merkel:/org/&ftp-debian-org;/testing/update_out/ (or -in merkel:~aba/testing/update_out to see a setup with -a smaller packages file). Via web, it's at +If you want to see more details, you can look it up on . The hints are available via . +url="http://&ftp-master-host;/testing/hints/">, where you can find +the +description +as well. With the hints, the Debian Release team can block or unblock +packages, ease or force packages into testing, remove +packages from testing, approve uploads to +testing-proposed-updates or override the urgency.
@@ -2590,11 +2705,11 @@ url="http://&ftp-master-host;/testing/hints/">.
Direct updates to testing -The testing distribution is fed with packages from +The testing distribution is fed with packages from unstable according to the rules explained above. However, -in some cases, it is necessary to upload packages built only for -testing. For that, you may want to upload to -testing-proposed-updates. +in some cases, it is necessary to upload packages built only for +testing. For that, you may want to upload to +testing-proposed-updates. Keep in mind that packages uploaded there are not automatically processed, they @@ -2606,17 +2721,17 @@ give on &email-debian-devel-announce;. You should not upload to testing-proposed-updates when you can update your packages through unstable. If you can't -(for example because you have a newer development version in unstable -), you may use this facility, but it is recommended that you ask for +(for example because you have a newer development version in unstable), +you may use this facility, but it is recommended that you ask for authorization from the release manager first. Even if a package is frozen, updates through unstable are possible, if the upload via unstable does not pull in any new dependencies. -Version numbers are usually selected by adding the codename of the -testing distribution and a running number, like -1.2sarge1 for the first upload through -testing-proposed-updates of package version +Version numbers are usually selected by adding the codename of the +testing distribution and a running number, like +1.2squeeze1 for the first upload through +testing-proposed-updates of package version 1.2. @@ -2626,8 +2741,8 @@ Please make sure you didn't miss any of these items in your upload: Make sure that your package really needs to go through -testing-proposed-updates, and can't go through -unstable; +testing-proposed-updates, and can't go through +unstable; @@ -2680,14 +2795,14 @@ currently, these are critical, grave and Such bugs are presumed to have an impact on the chances that the package will be released with the stable release of Debian: in general, -if a package has open release-critical bugs filed on it, it won't get into -testing, and consequently won't be released in -stable. +if a package has open release-critical bugs filed on it, it won't get into +testing, and consequently won't be released in +stable. The unstable bug count are all release-critical bugs which -are marked to apply to package/version - combinations that are available in unstable for a release +are marked to apply to package/version +combinations that are available in unstable for a release architecture. The testing bug count is defined analogously.
@@ -2699,13 +2814,13 @@ break other packages? The structure of the distribution archives is such that they can only contain one version of a package; a package is defined by its name. So when the source package acmefoo is installed into testing, -along with its binary packages acme-foo-bin, -acme-bar-bin, libacme-foo1 and -libacme-foo-dev, the old version is removed. +along with its binary packages acme-foo-bin, +acme-bar-bin, libacme-foo1 and +libacme-foo-dev, the old version is removed. However, the old version may have provided a binary package with an old soname -of a library, such as libacme-foo0. Removing the old +of a library, such as libacme-foo0. Removing the old acmefoo will remove libacme-foo0, which will break any packages which depend on it.