[maemo-developers] Debmaster: Help for PyMaemo dependency hell on Fremantle?

[From: Jeremiah Foster]

On Sep 25, 2009, at 20:32, Thomas Wälti wrote:

> Hello all

Hi Thomas!
>
> I was now able to resolve my issues with mclock.

Glad to hear it, and thanks for posting your resolution here. :-)
>
> The second issue seems to be a bug somewhere between py2deb,  
> autobuilder and the uploader to the repos: the build number isn't  
> recognized by the repo loader.

By "build number" do you mean package version?

> Therefore, all my subsequent (increased) builds of version 0.6.0  
> were ignored by the repo loader, the original 0.6.0 therefore being  
> the one remaining in the repo. This I resolved by increasing the  
> minor version (instead of just the build number). However, this is  
> not the proper way and I want therefore ask Jeremiah and/or the  
> person responsible for the repo loader if they can take a look at  
> the files I uploaded and see if they find an error in my .dsc  
> or .changes file. This would help me fix any bug in py2deb.

Just to clarify things, the software has a version, the debian  
packaging has a version, and the maemo packging has a version. I know  
it is confusing, but lets take a look at a package name:

lynx_2.8.6-2.1maemo3

The first part, the part before the underscore, is the name of the  
software (lynx). The number after the underscore is the software  
version (2.8.6). The number after the dash is the debian package  
version (2.1). The number after the debian is the maemo version, or  
'identifier' (maemo3). You should use the identifier when you modify a  
package from another system specifically for maemo. If you are just  
building for maemo you do not need to add the identifier.

In your case we have;

mclock_0.6.4

Here the is just a name and a software version. I recommend you add -1  
to the end the next time you make a package, then your users know if  
you have revised the software, or just the packaging. For example, if  
you work on the packaging only and upload the new package, you might  
want to call it

mclock_0.6.4-2

so that people know it is a new packaged version of the same software.  
Obviously if you revised the software you would probably do

mclock_0.6.5-1

Warm regards,

Jeremiah