Upstream source

[Farzad FARID]

Sven Mueller wrote:
> Farzad, I'm not sure wether I understand you correctly. Does that mean
> that you re-packaged the .orig.tar.gz? If so: You shouldn't do this,
>   
Yes I did... Actually I tried to blindly do something similar to the 2.2
packaging. I think the 2.2 orig.tar.gz contains "configure" and
"automake" related files that are updated, therefore different, from the
upstream source. Is that right?
> strictly speaking. If possible, the .orig.tar.gz should really be
> identical (at least in content) to the source archive provided by
> upstream. If that doesn't work out for you, please ask for help on the
> list. I initially also repackaged the upstream source, removing all
> auto-generated file from it, but eventually, that made package
> maintenanve a lot harder when a new upstream version appeared which
> included additional files (or deleted previously existing ones), since
> you had to re-do all the re-packaging work essentially.
>   
The problem *may* actually be that using snv-builpackage (or
pbuilder/cowbuilder for my part) hides theses problems.

I *think* (and then again I have to check this all again) that the
"debian/rules clean" suppresses files that are present in the upstream
cyrus-imapd 2.3 tar.gz. Therefore, because I didn't want to touch too
much to the "rules" file, and because "debuild" kept messing up my
source tree, I switched to pbuilder.

So, I asking for help and advise :) If we redo the orig.tar.gz the most
impacted file will be 99-update-autoconf.dpatch, but we also have to
update the "deletable files" list, right?

 Regards,

-- 
Farzad FARID <ffarid at pragmatic-source.com>
Architecte Open Source / Pragmatic Source
http://www.pragmatic-source.com/