unversioned upstream source

Peter Gordon peter at thecodergeek.com
Sat Jul 8 09:46:13 UTC 2006


Patrice Dumas wrote:
> 
> Jochen objects to that, saying that the Source should be downloadable, like
> Source0:        http://www.engineers.auckland.ac.nz/~snor007/src/uread.tar.gz

The reason for this is so that the source tarball included in your SRPM 
can be verified to be the same as the source tarball from upstream.


> What do you think about that issue? What do you think is best practice
> and why?

In my view, the method you've described (adding a comment to the spec 
with instructions on how to get the sources from upstream and rename 
them as needed) should be adequate. However, for packaging it in Extras 
as well as possibly many other distros/formats, I'd also highly suggest 
that you contact the upstream author and ask him/her (them?) to add
some form of versioning to their tarball naming.

-- 
Peter Gordon (codergeek42)
GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint:
   DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 251 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20060708/28033962/attachment.sig>


More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list