patches to wesnoth, or rather general issue with substvar handling

[Emilio Pozuelo Monfort]

Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
>         Hi!
> 
> [going as Bcc to the MOTUs which are listed in the changelog of wesnoth
> explicitly]
> 
>  I just recently gone through the MOTU patches of wesnoth again, and
> noticed one thing that looks pretty strange to me and one thing that is
> just wrong and should get checked for other packages, too.
> 
>  The first thing is a redundant added dependency on libsdl1.2-dev. There
> are already Build-Depends on libsdl-net1.2-dev, libsdl-mixer1.2-dev and
> libsdl-image1.2-dev which all three of them depend on libsdl1.2-dev
> itself so it really makes me wonder why that is needed or why it was
> added. I don't expect the Ubuntu libsdl packaging being totally
> different to the Debian one, so why this is needed is somehow out of my
> reach.

At one point in the past, libsdl-*1.2-dev packages didn't depend on the
libsdl1.2-dev package, causing a FTBFS. If you look at the changelog, you will see:

    - Added libsdl1.2-dev to Build-deps (fix FTBFS)

 -- Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <pochu at ubuntu.com>  Wed, 14 Mar 2007 23:10:08 +0100

That was in Feisty, and it's fixed now, so we can remove it. But why would you
remove it? You shouldn't rely on dependencies of your build-dependencies, since
in the future they can change, causing a FTBFS. If you have a dependency on a
package, shouldn't you put it, regardless of the other build-dependencies?

> 
>  The other thing which is pretty nasty and can give you headaches in
> cases you would need to do binary-only rebuilds without source changes
> is a false usage of substvars: Any package, especially Arch: all
> packages (in this case, wesnoth-all) that has a versioned dependency
> on an Arch: any package (in this case, wesnoth, wesnoth-editor,
> wesnoth-server) will have to use the ${binary:Version} instead of the
> ${source:Version} to not create troubles for such uploads.

We don't do binary-only rebuilds AFAIK, but that isn't a excuse not to fix it ;)

> 
>  This thing propably won't need to get fixed for wesnoth because I plan
> to introduce the wesnoth-all package in Debian too, suggested by
> upstream (never heard anything about it from any MOTU that this patch is
> hanging in there, though, which I would have expected out of courtsey
> and getting changes pushed back upstream), but I thought I'd make you
> aware of the issue in case this wrong approach is used in other MOTU
> patches, too.

I mailed (more than once) to Isaac Clerencia, who is the Debian Maintainer, and
he told me he was going to add it. Maybe he forgot about it...

Isaac Clerencia wrote:
> On Saturday, 5 May 2007, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>> Hi Isaac
>>
>> I'm maintaining wesnoth in Ubuntu, and I created a meta-package,
>> wesnoth-all, which depends in the campaigns, the sound... (everything
>> but the server). This is for an easier install, since now the
>> gnome-app-install installs wesnoth-all, so it gives the user a fully game.
>>
>> I was wondering whether you can introduce this change in the debian
>> package, so we have the less differences as possible.
>>
>> Please, let me know what do you think.
> I don't have any problem doing that, I'll do it in the next release.

Also, I sent him this patch. Feel free to apply it too!
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/9284696/wesnoth_1.2.6-1ubuntu%5B1%2C2%5D.debdiff
https://launchpad.net/bugs/113361

I'll remember to CC you next time I change wesnoth in Ubuntu!

Best,
Emilio

> 
>  So long, and thanks for keeping in touch. :)
> Rhonda
> 


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-motu/attachments/20071023/27dee9aa/attachment.pgp