Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Debian Packages To Eliminate Vendor-Specific Patches, Affecting Downstreams Like Ubuntu

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Debian Packages To Eliminate Vendor-Specific Patches, Affecting Downstreams Like Ubuntu

    Phoronix: Debian Packages To Eliminate Vendor-Specific Patches, Affecting Downstreams Like Ubuntu

    Debian packages have supported the concept of vendor-specific patches whereby when DPKG unpacks a source package on different operating systems / distributions (such as Debian vs. Ubuntu), different patches could be selectively applied. Ubuntu is one of the main benefactors of this feature while effective immediately these vendor-specific patches to source packages will be treated as a bug and will be unpermitted following the Debian 10 "Buster" release...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...Specific-Patch

  • #2
    Great decision.

    Who on earth thought this up in the first place? Surely a package should install the same software no matter which distro is doing the installing.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Slithery View Post
      Great decision.

      Who on earth thought this up in the first place? Surely a package should install the same software no matter which distro is doing the installing.
      It will still be patched when you install on Ubuntu just that Ubuntu will have to carry the patched themselves instead of having them stored upstream.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Slithery View Post
        Great decision.

        Who on earth thought this up in the first place? Surely a package should install the same software no matter which distro is doing the installing.
        Whilst I kinda agree, Linux is a little bit messier than that. For example some distros store things in a different prefix such as /usr/local rather than /usr.
        Also, I don't know how this will affect Debian GNU/kfreebsd but FreeBSD stores software in /usr/local.

        WIth i386 compatibility libraries that everyone is seeming fine with requiring for sloppy proprietary software, these are in different locations too.

        Also with the introduction of systemd, the init system has fragmented further and startup scripts are even more distro specific than before.

        Or if you are a systemd fanatic:

        Even with the introduction of systemd, the init system ecosystem in Linux is still quite fragmented and thus startup scripts are still quite distro specific.

        I also imagine that distros that are not bothering with Wayland will also require different default compiler flags in the src package.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Slithery View Post
          Surely a package should install the same software no matter which distro is doing the installing.
          That is rarely the case as different Distros compile packages with different options

          Comment


          • #6
            This probably means that at some point in the future Ubuntu is no longer really a Debian derivative, but its own thing. Not sure if this is good or bad; probably both.

            Comment


            • #7
              With five votes in favour and none against, the resolution passes.
              I have nothing to comment too Derivatives should keep their patches on their own, so elsewhere.

              If MS wanna buy MS's company, things should be ready
              Last edited by dungeon; 11-13-2018, 05:04 PM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by kpedersen View Post
                Whilst I kinda agree, Linux is a little bit messier than that. For example some distros store things in a different prefix such as /usr/local rather than /usr.
                Also, I don't know how this will affect Debian GNU/kfreebsd but FreeBSD stores software in /usr/local.
                I am not sure about debs, but rpms have macros for that sort of thing. They are things like %{_prefix} or %{_lib} that are replaced with the appropriate platform-specific directory at build time. I assume debs would have something similar.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by bison View Post
                  This probably means that at some point in the future Ubuntu is no longer really a Debian derivative, but its own thing. Not sure if this is good or bad; probably both.
                  Valve have Debian derivative, Canonical too, Google too, Microsoft too, etc... it is not just Ubuntu anymore, imagine Debian to allow vendor patches to all of them, so none is better than to enter to mess

                  But if you allow to one, everybody else will say - OK and here is mine
                  Last edited by dungeon; 11-13-2018, 05:31 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    does this mean that firefox will no longer have global menu patch on Ubuntu?

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X