Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On 18 Jun 2006, Goswin von Brederlow outgrape: > >> Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >>> Goswin von Brederlow wrote: >>>> On the other hand the savings can be huge. Think about how many >>>> packages install latex and fonts and generate the documentation >>>> needlessly during build. Installing and purging latex as well as >>>> all the initex runs and font generation takes up a awfull lot of >>>> time >>> >>> I think most packages build their documentation or other >>> architecture-independent parts as part of a general make/make >>> install process, so it's not possible to create useful separate >>> build-arch and build-indep targets. >> >> A lot of software has a doc dir and it is relatively simple to >> seperate recursing into doc from the rest. Unless the build-* >> targets become actually usefull nobody will put any work into >> splitting the build process into arch and indep parts though. > > Umm. Most of my packages I can simply call "make" or "ake > build" and let upstream Makefiles build stuff -- which means that if > the arch indep part is split of changed (./scripts dir, for example), > I do not have to change my rules file to follow suit. In this case, > splitting the buiild process into arch and indep parts is not trivial.
I would think "make" will always do the customary "all" and include docs and such. But what stops you from having a "make binary" to compile and "make doc" in the Makefile? Yes you need to change the makefile and debian/rules but it usualy isn't that hard. >>> Looking at the archive right now, there are only 129 source >>> packages (in testing) that are not Architecture: all and declare >>> Build-Depends-Indep (and quite a few of those are obviously wrong). >>> So it seems to be a limited problem. However, if your concern is >>> mostly to reduce installation time of documentation tools, then the >>> current Build-Depends/Build-Depends-Indep setup seems to work quite >>> well. I don't see where Build-Depends-Arch would fit in there. >> >> The problem currently is that it isn't even possible to seperate >> them even if the makefile suports it because the build target must >> be called. The proposal is as much a clarification and extension of >> the Build-Depends* fields as a mechanism to detect and use build-* >> targets. Only then can one split arch and indep building and have a >> meaningfull Build-Depends-Indep. > > I think the way to do this is to make the build target depend > on build-arch and build-indep, so calling build builds everything, > but allows for a future improvement in efficiency. Assuming, of > course, that upstream build process also allows for this split up. We already have that like forever. This is not helping at all since you can't detect the existance of build-arch/indep in the makefile correctly and thus dpkg-buildpackage can never call it. So you always call build and always need all Build-Depends for arch and indep building. THAT is the core problem. > manoj MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]