On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 1:13 PM Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@inai.de> wrote:
On Wednesday 2021-02-24 16:40, Spiro Trikaliotis wrote:
OBS uses a .dsc alone much like it were a rpm .spec that can be hand edited, and this is a great convenience. I can build a .dsc without having any debian tools on a non-debian platform (alpine linux, for example), and feed that into obs to get debian package builds.
It might be a convenience for people who do not have a debian platform, but for sure, only for them.
For users on a Debian platform, it is a PITA to perform this double-housekeeping.
...and someone has yet to propose to fix this in Debian.
I'm honestly a bit surprised that we don't have the path of using RPM spec files to build Debian packages documented on that wiki page. That's been possible for more than seven years...
What contents does the .dsc have that OBS needs from it, and not from debian/control? To be honest, I do not see anything.
The .dsc is used for sources and for Build-Depends.
What I am doing: Whenever I do any significant change to the control file, I run the build on a Debian, extract the resulting .dsc and put it into obs.
Straight-forward, isn't it?
"stuff the control file's metadata into a .deb only to extract it again (with a new extension)" is the antithesis to straight-forwardness.
If this is really possible, then debian/control must contain all necessary information, mustn't it? So, why does OBS need the .dsc in the first place?
The control file traditionally doesn't list the source tarballs, does it?
It does not. The dsc file is the list of inputs as a whole, both build dependencies and all the files that are used for the package build. That's why it's called the "Debian Source Control" (DSC) file. -- 真実はいつも一つ!/ Always, there's only one truth!