[pkg-boinc-devel] RFS: BOINC

[Frank S. Thomas]

On Tuesday 20 December 2005 09:57, Steffen Moeller wrote:
> > A remaining question is if we should add a .dfsg. suffix to the tarball
> > name, because the export-boinc script, which is used to create the
> > tarballs, removes some non-free and unneeded stuff from the CVS export.
> > For example it removes the build systems for mac and windows, because
> > these include binary files without their sources or have non-free
> > licenses. And also copies of cURL, OpenSSL and zlib are removed - we
> > build depend on the respective packages and having those copies in the
> > tarball is a waste of space.
>
> Hm. I think that this is not required since you only remove stuff from the
> distribution without changing the functionality 

At least not for Debian users. Rebuilding BOINC for Mac OS or Windows is 
probably not possible with our tarball.

> and do you do not actively 
> patch the source in order to be using something compatible to upstream.

It isn't my impression that this is a "requirement" for using the .dfsg. 
suffix. I thought it just means: "This is a repackaged orig.tar.gz without 
some files, due to their DFSG incompatibility." We don't repackage any 
orig.tar.gz, because upstream provides none, but we are removing non-free 
content from the CVS export. Adding the .dfsg. suffix would make clear that 
our tarballs do not contain a pristine CVS export.
Hence, my suggestion is to add the .dfsg. suffix.

> Have you contacted
> upstream with the suggestion to leave the external libraries aside?

No, I think it's easier for them to build BOINC on systems where installation 
of packages is not as easy as "apt-get install <packages>" (Windows, Mac OS) 
if these libs are part of the CVS checkout.

Grüße,
Frank

-- 
Anmut bringen wir ins Leben;
 Leget Anmut in das Geben.