On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 12:33:55AM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote: > > I think most of the changes are probably self-explanatory from the diff. > > The only thing I would draw attention to is this change in debian/rules:
> > -DEB_DH_STRIP_ARGS_$(UDEB_PKG) = --dbg-package= > > +DEB_DH_STRIP_ARGS_$(UDEB_PKG) = > > This is needed for compatibility with debhelper 7; where compat level 5 > > ignores the null --dbg-package argument, debhelper 7 does something very > > unhelpful instead (I forget exactly what). > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=629156 > Last time I checked, DEB_DH_STRIP_ARGS_$(UDEB_PKG) = did not work as intended, > i.e. dh_strip for the udeb package was called with > --dbg-package=libglib2.0-0-dbg and as a result the detached debugging symbols > of > the deb package were overwritten. Ok, I've retested this and find that dh_strip outputs the following: dh_strip -plibglib2.0-udeb --dbg-package= Option dbg-package requires an argument But it does not fail. It seems that failing on an invalid option is a change introduced only in debhelper compat level 8, whereas this patch only updates glib2.0 to use compat level 7. My branch history seems to confirm that this was only needed while I was experimenting with compat levels >= 8. http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~vorlon/glib/multiarch/revision/67 I'm pretty sure that I have *used* the glib2.0 dbg package in Ubuntu since making this change, so for some reason it seems to work despite the bug you mention above. But if you think it's safer to retain the --dbg-package= argument, there doesn't seem to be any harm. Thanks, -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature