"Giacomo A. Catenazzi" <c...@debian.org> writes: > Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> The only builds Debian supports are not just the buildd ones. As >> members of the free software community, we should also cater to end >> users building, tweaking, and rebuilding our software. > You are a very special case: a developer since very long time, with a > enormous knowledge of debian policy (and dpkg internal). But I really > think that most people outside DD use dpkg-buildpackage because it is > the easier way (without need to remember a lot of details). I think > also that most of DDs use dpkg-buildpackage. The number of people using different methods is fairly irrelevant to Manoj's point. The question is more fundamental: are packages built by a makefile that we call debian/rules, or are they built by the program dpkg-buildpackage using debian/rules as a configuration file for that program? If they're built by the program, then anyone who wants to properly build the software, even if they don't want to go all the way to the package, will need to use the program, since people will write debian/rules such that it assumes the program is in use. They'll assume default CFLAGS are set and so forth. I don't think this is the right direction to go, but I'm not going to stomp off in a huff if we go that direction or anything. :) But I do want to be sure that we're all clear on what we're saying if we do take that approach and make dpkg-buildpackage the only supported way to build packages. I think it's likely that if we go that route, with it providing the defaults, we'll find over time that some packages will either not build or will mis-build with debian/rules build and no one will notice or be particularly interested in fixing it. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org