Re: debian/rules being or not a makefile
On Mon, Feb 16, 2009, Russ Allbery wrote: Why would we want to sanction that when the same effect can be achieved by using a debian/rules of: #!/usr/bin/make -f %: dh $@ without risking breaking any existing assumptions or software? Which software would be affected? -- Loïc Minier -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: debian/rules being or not a makefile
On Tue, 2009-02-17 at 11:16 +0100, Loïc Minier wrote: On Mon, Feb 16, 2009, Russ Allbery wrote: Why would we want to sanction that when the same effect can be achieved by using a debian/rules of: #!/usr/bin/make -f %: dh $@ without risking breaking any existing assumptions or software? Which software would be affected? dpkg-source -b, for one. You can't put a symlink in the diff.gz. Cheers, Julien -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: debian/rules being or not a makefile
Le mardi 17 février 2009 à 13:03 +0100, Julien Cristau a écrit : dpkg-source -b, for one. You can't put a symlink in the diff.gz. Is that still a problem with the quilt source package format? -- .''`. Debian 5.0 Lenny has been released! : :' : `. `' Last night, Darth Vader came down from planet Vulcan and `-told that if you don't install Lenny, he'd melt your brain. signature.asc Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée
Re: debian/rules being or not a makefile
* Julien Cristau [Tue, 17 Feb 2009 13:03:18 +0100]: On Tue, 2009-02-17 at 11:16 +0100, Loïc Minier wrote: On Mon, Feb 16, 2009, Russ Allbery wrote: Why would we want to sanction that when the same effect can be achieved by using a debian/rules of: #!/usr/bin/make -f %: dh $@ without risking breaking any existing assumptions or software? Which software would be affected? dpkg-source -b, for one. You can't put a symlink in the diff.gz. I thought exactly the same, but this could be a feature (the - dh symlink) that v3 source packages could use. However, I don't think it's a good idea at all, and hope it doesn't go forward. -- Adeodato Simó dato at net.com.org.es Debian Developer adeodato at debian.org If there is a sin against life, it consists perhaps not so much in despairing of life as in hoping for another life and in eluding the implacable grandeur of this life. -- Albert Camus -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: debian/rules being or not a makefile
Loïc Minier l...@dooz.org writes: On Mon, Feb 16, 2009, Russ Allbery wrote: Why would we want to sanction that when the same effect can be achieved by using a debian/rules of: #!/usr/bin/make -f %: dh $@ without risking breaking any existing assumptions or software? Which software would be affected? A variety of things that are probably fixable, but I don't see why we should go to the effort. For example, that would confuse Lintian and require special-casing there (and even more special-casing if someone gets the bright idea to do that with four other packaging helpers). As mentioned, dpkg-source -b can't represent the symlink. Anything that uses make -f debian/rules would break; I don't know if anything currently does that, but per Policy it's currently required to work. There isn't anything inherently wrong with the idea in the abstract, but it breaks various guarantees that are currently present in Policy for no compelling reason that I can see. That to me makes it exactly the sort of thing that you're not supposed to do with standards. Once something is written into the standard, changes should be judged against whether there's a compelling reason for change even if no one is aware of anything specific that the change would break. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: debian/rules being or not a makefile
On Tue, 17 Feb 2009, Josselin Mouette wrote: Le mardi 17 février 2009 à 13:03 +0100, Julien Cristau a écrit : dpkg-source -b, for one. You can't put a symlink in the diff.gz. Is that still a problem with the quilt source package format? No. (But I don't like the idea of having debian/rules a symlink either) Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog Le best-seller français mis à jour pour Debian Etch : http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: debian/rules being or not a makefile
Charles Plessy ple...@debian.org writes: It seems that making debian/rules a symbolic link to /usr/bin/dh might actually work for some packages (although I have not yet tried), so it could be the perfect timing to double-think whether it is not as heretic as it looks, as long as it would follow the Policy requirements about the expected result of debian/rules clean build binary (and binary-arch and binary-indep if the ongoing discussion does not end up in their deprecation). Why would we want to sanction that when the same effect can be achieved by using a debian/rules of: #!/usr/bin/make -f %: dh $@ without risking breaking any existing assumptions or software? -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
