On 29/10/13 15:37, Ximin Luo wrote:
> On 29/10/13 15:18, James McCoy wrote:
>> This is not a bug in debuild. “debuild $target” should behave similar to
>> “dpkg-buildpackage -T $target” and as stated in dpkg-buildpackage(1):
>>
>
> I'm sorry, closing this bug is a lazy cop-out that ignores a legitimate
> usability issue. Right now I cannot easily cleanup after a build; I do not
> want to use -tc because I'd like to examine the build products manually
> first, and manually running `dpkg-source --{before,after}-build` is usability
> bullshit.
>
> I agree there is an "expectation [..] that the working tree is in a proper
> state", but this is enforced no-where by the user-facing tools. Fixing the
> behaviour as I suggested DOES NOT BREAK ANYTHING, since it simply puts the
> tree into the state it is *supposed to already be in*. What's more, it might
> even expose subtle bugs where maintainers are incorrectly depending on a
> non-patched tree, for example #728097. That bug would not even exist if this
> issue had been properly detected by the build tools.
>
Thinking about this some more, I'm leaning towards the opinion that this is
more correctly devscripts problem. dpkg-buildpackage is quite a low-level tool
used by buildd and other infrastructure, so does not need to be nice to users.
It might even be better for them to assume certain things about the source tree.
However, (and correct me if I'm wrong), but debuild is a user-facing tool, so
you do not have that excuse. There is no need for debuild to "behave similar to
dpkg-buildpackage -T $target". The description of devscripts is "scripts to
make the life of a Debian Package maintainer easier". Me having to run
"dpkg-source --{before,after}-build" does not make my life easier.
If you don't disagree, I'll re-assign this back to devscripts.
X
--
GPG: 4096R/1318EFAC5FBBDBCE
git://github.com/infinity0/pubkeys.git
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
