On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 12:42:10PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote: > On Sat, Apr 16, 2005 at 03:30:14AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > > clone 301607 -1 > > reassign -1 cstream > > severity -1 serious > > retitle -1 cstream: debian/rules clean modifies the source package > > severity 301607 important > > thanks
> > I don't consider this a release-critical bug in cdbs because packages > > shouldn't be using DEB_AUTO_UPDATE_DEBIAN_CONTROL *anyway*: packages that do > > so are in violation of policy section 4.8, because it means > > ./debian/rules build clean is no longer idempotent when run using differing > > versions of cdbs. > That's for a very particular interpretation of "idempotency" (that when the > environment changes, results must be the same). > If dpkg didn't require debian/control to exist during the clean target, we > could generate it somewhere else and remove it during clean (just like any > other temporary file) and fully idempotency would be archieved. > If you're concerned about that, you might want to read bug #293489 and try to > convince the dpkg maintainers about my proposed change. I'd certainly > appreciate it if that happened. No, I think those proposed changes are a terrible idea. debian/control should not undergo functional changes as a result of a changing environment, and anything that depends on such a feature is broken. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
