Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why does Debian change software?

blog.liw.fi

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 210 posts

Re: Why does Debian change software?

#41

Post by JdeBP »

guappa wrote: post #20
JdeBP wrote: post #16

The point about manual pages has always seemed to me to be one of the points where the system fails us. There are a fair number of manual pages that the world at large would benefit from having in the original softwares, that are instead stuck buried in a patches subdirectory in a Debian git repository, and have been for years. This is not to say that Debian is the sole example of this. The FreeBSD/NetBSD packages/po…

That only happens if the project lacks a manual page or if it's really bad.

"only happens" is a lot more often that you think. In my experience, "only" is quite frequent.

A randomly picked case in point:

Debian has had a local manual page for the original software's undocumented (in the old Sourceforge version) iptunnel(8) command for 7 years:

https://salsa.debian.org/debian/net-tools/-/blob/debian/sid/...

Independently, the original came up with its own, quite different, manual page 3 years later:

https://github.com/ecki/net-tools/blob/master/man/en_US/iptu...

Then Debian imported that!

https://salsa.debian.org/debian/net-tools/-/blob/debian/sid/...

This sort of thing isn't a rare occurrence.

Re: Why does Debian change software?

#42

Post by JdeBP »

pabs3 wrote: post #31
JdeBP wrote: post #16

The point about manual pages has always seemed to me to be one of the points where the system fails us. There are a fair number of manual pages that the world at large would benefit from having in the original softwares, that are instead stuck buried in a patches subdirectory in a Debian git repository, and have been for years. This is not to say that Debian is the sole example of this. The FreeBSD/NetBSD packages/po…

Usually the Debian manual page author or package maintainer will send that upstream. Same goes for patches. Sometimes upstream doesn't want manual pages, or wants it in a different format, and the Debian person doesn't have time to rewrite it.

There's a belief that this is usual. But having watched the process for a couple of decades, it seems to me that that is just a belief, and actual practice doesn't work that way. A lot of times this stuff just gets stuck and never sent along.

I also think that the idea that original authors must not accept manual pages is a way of explaining how the belief does not match reality, without accepting that it is the belief itself that is wrong. Certainly, the number of times that things work out like the net-tools example elsethread, where clearly the original authors do want manual pages, because they eventually wrote some, and end up duplicating Debian's (and FreeBSD's/NetBSD's) efforts, is evidence that contradicts the belief that there's some widespread no-manual-pages culture amongst developers.

Re: Why does Debian change software?

#43

Post by bayindirh »

lifthrasiir wrote: post #18
aragilar wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you go to https://tracker.debian.org/ for any package, it lists patches that need to be sent upstream.

Ah, I meant more about policies and guidelines. I'm not well-versed in Debian processes so I can for example imagine that only some patches get sent to the upstream only at the maintainers' discretion. It seems that Debian at least has a policy to maintain patches separate from the upstream source though.

Debian uses Quilt system for per-package patch maintenance. While packaging a software you get the original source (i.e. orig.tar.gz), and add patches on top of it with Quilt, and build it that way.

Then you run the tests, and if they pass, you package and upload it.

This allows a patch(set) can be sent to the upstream as a package saying "we did this, and if you want to include them, this apply cleanly to version x.y.z, any feedback is welcome".

Re: Why does Debian change software?

#44

Post by [deleted] »

JdeBP wrote: post #16

The point about manual pages has always seemed to me to be one of the points where the system fails us. There are a fair number of manual pages that the world at large would benefit from having in the original softwares, that are instead stuck buried in a patches subdirectory in a Debian git repository, and have been for years. This is not to say that Debian is the sole example of this. The FreeBSD/NetBSD packages/po…

[deleted]

Re: Why does Debian change software?

#46

Post by mnau »

pabs3 wrote: post #35
jeroenhd wrote: post #27

All of these reasons are good, but they're not comprehensive. Unless someone can tell me what category Debian's alterations to xscreensaver fall under, maybe. As far as I can tell, that was just done for aesthetic reasons and packagers disagreeing with upstream.

The patches and their explanations are listed here: https://udd.debian.org/patches.cgi?src=xscreensaver&version=... Edit: can't find any that are for aesthetic reasons.

91_remove_version_upgrade_warnings.patch is the one for asthetic reasons.

Debian keeps ancient versions that have many fixed bugs. Upstream maintainer has to deal with fallout of bug reports of obsolete version. To mitigate his workload, he added obsolete version warning. Debian removed it.

Re: Why does Debian change software?

#47

Post by quietbritishjim »

mnau wrote: post #46
pabs3 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The patches and their explanations are listed here: https://udd.debian.org/patches.cgi?src=xscreensaver&version=... Edit: can't find any that are for aesthetic reasons.

91_remove_version_upgrade_warnings.patch is the one for asthetic reasons. Debian keeps ancient versions that have many fixed bugs. Upstream maintainer has to deal with fallout of bug reports of obsolete version. To mitigate his workload, he added obsolete version warning. Debian removed it.

I'll admit that I haven't inspected the patch, but how could that warning possibly work without checking version information somewhere on the internet? That was listed in OP.

Re: Why does Debian change software?

#48

Post by alias_neo »

pabs3 wrote: post #36
alias_neo wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a native (British) English speaker, I was also unclear until reading the article. Personally, I believe s/change/modify would make more sense, but that's just my opinion. That aside, I'm a big fan of Debian, it has always "felt" quieter as a distro to me compared to others, which is something I care greatly about; and it's great to see that removing of calling home is a core principle. All the more reason to have…

Patching out privacy issues isn't in Debian Policy, its just part of the culture of Debian, but there are still unfixed/unfound issues too, it is best to run opensnitch to mitigate some of those problems. https://wiki.debian.org/PrivacyIssues

Thanks for the link, that'll come in very useful.

> it is best to run opensnitch to mitigate some of those problems

Opensnitch is a nice recommendation for someone concerned about protecting their workstation(s); for me, I'm more concerned about the tens of VMs and containers running hundreds of pieces of software that are always-on in my Homelab, a privacy conscious OS is a good foundation, and there are many more layers that I won't go into unsolicited.

Re: Why does Debian change software?

#49

Post by sneak »

quietbritishjim wrote: post #47
mnau wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

91_remove_version_upgrade_warnings.patch is the one for asthetic reasons. Debian keeps ancient versions that have many fixed bugs. Upstream maintainer has to deal with fallout of bug reports of obsolete version. To mitigate his workload, he added obsolete version warning. Debian removed it.

I'll admit that I haven't inspected the patch, but how could that warning possibly work without checking version information somewhere on the internet? That was listed in OP.

IIRC it just hardcodes the release date and complains if it is more than 2 or 3 years later.

It’s somewhat reasonable. I agree Debian should patch out phone-home and autoupdate (aka developer RCE). They should have left the xscreensaver local-only warning in, though. It is not a privacy or system integrity issue.

jwz however is also off the rails with entitlement.

They’re both wrong.

Re: Why does Debian change software?

#50

Post by diggan »

pabs3 wrote: post #24
TekMol wrote: post #4

Debian will remove code that “calls home” or tries to update software in a way that bypasses the Debian packaging system. Thank god. I'm so happy that such a distro exists.

This is unfortunately not part of Debian Policy yet, and there are still lots of privacy issues of different severities in Debian. https://wiki.debian.org/PrivacyIssues

I don't use Debian for servers nor personal computers anymore, but the fact that they themselves host a page explaining potential privacy issues with Debian makes me trust them a lot more, and feel safer recommending it to others when it fits.
Post reply on HN