also sprach Jean Parpaillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.06.12.0931 +0200]: > Uhhh, > I did not want to launch such a big discussion :-)
Then you should not have written to debian-devel. :) > - I first used a simple "rules" script, because I can not imagine > using a wrapper while not knowing the system it is around. > - But now, I use CDBS because it is much simpler to follow the > policies with it, and to have "good practices", ie using > *.install, *.dirs, etc. files. Those files are debhelper files; you don't need to use CDBS to use them. > To conclude, I will use CDBS because : > - I know how to write a package without it > - and there are no hacks in the packaging. Fine. Your choice. Hopefully I never have to step in to help out with your package. also sprach Tollef Fog Heen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.06.12.1051 +0200]: > > Is Debhelper our C and CDBS our C++? > > CDBS is to debhelper as XSLT (or prolog) is to C (or another procedural > language). Riiiight. also sprach Christoph Berg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.06.12.1138 +0200]: > Not in that length. The template question used by most AMs is: > > Write a small shell script which does the following two things: > a. prints whether a Debian package archive file has a copyright file > in the appropriate location. > b. prints out the package version from the control file which is > inside the .deb. > You may use tar, ar, grep, etc., but not any middle or high-level > dpkg tools. Neither of these tests show whether the candidate can build a source package without helpers. -- Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list! .''`. martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : :' : proud Debian developer and author: http://debiansystem.info `. `'` `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system "the 'volatile' keyword is implemented syntactically but not semantically" -- documentation of m$ visual c, around 1992
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature (GPG/PGP)
