Hi Dmitry, So sorry for my extremely belated reply! This one fell through the cracks.
On Thu, Sep 06, 2018 at 01:07:20PM +0300, Dmitry Shachnev wrote: > Control: reassign -1 debhelper 9.20160814 > Control: severity -1 wishlist > Control: merge 836699 -1 > > Hi Nicholas! > > On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 05:36:11PM -0400, Nicholas D Steeves wrote: > > Package: sphinx-common > > Version: 1.7.8-1 > > Severity: normal > > > > Part of the purpose of building with 'nodoc' is the omission of > > build-deps. dh_sphinxdoc should detect when 'nodoc' is active, then > > --with sphinxdoc should not attempt to do anything, other than print > > that it is doing nothing, because 'nodoc' is active. > > > > [...] > > > > It would be best if dh_sphinxdoc had its own 'ifneq ($(filter > > nodoc,$(DEB_BUILD_PROFILES)),)' logic. I suspect this is a trivially > > easy fix that could even be tagged 'newcomer'. > > dh_sphinxdoc already exits with status 0 (and a warning) when there is no > Sphinx documentation built. > > I suppose what you really want is a dh sequencer option to not call > dh_sphinxdoc when the nodoc profile is active. It is absolutely out of > our control, as sphinx packages cannot change debhelper behavior when > they are not even installed. > Yes, that's what I'm overriding in d/rules. Thank you for identifying and triaging to the appropriate package :-) > Therefore I am reassigning this bug to debhelper. I am also merging it > with #836699 because if the proposed idea [1] for fixing it is implemented, > you will be able to control activation of dh_sphinxdoc using only build > dependencies. > > [1]: > https://nthykier.wordpress.com/2018/03/04/prototyping-a-new-packaging-papercut-fix-dry-debhelper-compat-level/ Dear debhelper maintainers, RFC please? Regards, Nicholas
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
