There is a longer, time-consuming task, to be done by maintainers
of ports where upstream is alive.
Obviously, FIX_EXTRACT_PERMISSIONS is there to fix a problem. Namely
some software source archives have bogus paranoid permissions, and after
extraction, they're only readable by the user who extracted them (partly
or totally). This is thoroughly unfriendly in a world where dpb builds
stuff as a specific user (_pbuild) and where you may want to come in and
fix issues manually as *another* user.
After thinking long and hard about it, I see exactly zero case where
those archives are justified in not extracting to files readable by
everyone, so gently asking upstream to fix their distribution process
for the next version makes all kind of sense.
Eventually, I hope we'll get rid of most FIX_EXTRACT_PERMISSIONS usage.
Note that FIX_EXTRACT_PERMISSIONS also makes builds slightly slower,
because it traverses the WKRDIR right after extraction to tweak permissions.
Not an incredible time-waster, since most archives are fairly small, and
we do this as soon as possible, so it's likely most meta-data are still
cached, but... still in poor taste.
That also means that, if you maintain a port that now has
FIX_EXTRACT_PERMISSIONS, you should check whether it's still needed
when the next version rolls out (I know for a fact that recent versions
of boost no longer ship a paranoid source archive, for instance).