Hi Lennart, On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 09:20:39AM +0100, L.C. Karssen wrote: > Hi Andreas, > > Sorry, what is "dquilt" - I only know quilt (without the d in the > > beginning)? > > dquilt is an alias for quilt created in sections 3.1/3.2 of the URL > mentioned above: > alias dquilt='quilt --quiltrc=/home/lennart/.quiltrc-dpkg'
Ahhh, it is a long time ago I've read the docs. ;-) It is always good to talk to people who did it recently. ;-))) > > quilt pop -a > > > > to ensure that you are working on a clean upstream source when commiting > > your patches. > > Aha. Sounds indeed like something you want :-). :-) > > I restored the original upstream source in commit > > > > f102ee1d3141be3bba95e16d90f59bc5e9f9d01c > > > > I also have used `cme fix dpkg-control` (see > > > > e1c851706593ea122cfb1240c639f7670408e141 > > > > ) which I (strongly) recommend to anybody doing some packaging today. It > > just does "the right thing" (tm) with your d/control file. :-) > > And drags in a whole bunch of dependencies, wow :-). I agree d/control > looks better now. While it looks better it actually does not drag something additional in - just reformatting dependencies to have only one per line. I think it is a good idea to settle on this standard. Just learned it myself a couple of monthes ago and this is the first thing I'm doing with any old package ... > > Finally I commited a change which actually brings your change into > > effect because without doing a reconfigure Makefile.am is ignored and > > configure is just used as is (at least if no specific tricks are done > > which I did not checked for). > > I see I missed the autoreconf step. I should have thought of that! No problem. > > By doing so I tried to build the package again but I was running into > > > > make check-TESTS > > make[3]: Entering directory `/tmp/buildd/probabel-0.4.1/checks' > > make[4]: Entering directory `/tmp/buildd/probabel-0.4.1/checks' > > /bin/bash: /bin/bash: cannot execute binary file > > make[4]: *** [check_probabel.pl_chunk.sh.log] Error 126 > > make[4]: Leaving directory `/tmp/buildd/probabel-0.4.1/checks' > > make[3]: *** [check-TESTS] Error 2 > > make[3]: Leaving directory `/tmp/buildd/probabel-0.4.1/checks' > > make[2]: *** [check-am] Error 2 > > make[2]: Leaving directory `/tmp/buildd/probabel-0.4.1/checks' > > make[1]: *** [check-recursive] Error 1 > > make[1]: Leaving directory `/tmp/buildd/probabel-0.4.1' > > dh_auto_test: make -j1 check returned exit code 2 > > make: *** [build] Error 2 > > dpkg-buildpackage: error: debian/rules build gave error exit status 2 > > > > > > So it seems the change has introduced a problem with the reconfiguration > > since if you do > > > > $ git diff > > diff --git a/debian/rules b/debian/rules > > index 4ece2fa..970e910 100755 > > --- a/debian/rules > > +++ b/debian/rules > > @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ GIT_TAG := $(subst ~,_,$(VERSION)) > > # a similar manner are welcome. > > > > %: > > - dh $@ --parallel --with autoreconf > > + dh $@ --parallel > > > > override_dh_installdocs: > > dh_installdocs > > > > > > the build works again. > > > > Hope this gives some useful hints > > > I'll have a look if I can find what's missing. > > By the way, when running debuild I get several lines like: > awk: cmd. line:1: fatal: cannot open file `debian/gbp.conf' for > reading (No such file or directory) > I guess this comes from the variable you try to create in the default > rules file. I guess the d/gbp.conf file is missing in your default SVN > debian/ dir. What's supposed to be in that file? I personally would remove the variables which are not needed in the rules files which means remove them all except DEBPKGNAME. They are just inside the template as an option - perhaps I should put them in comments. I *personally* do not have any debian/gbp.conf file in my packages because I'm a fan of keeping things as simple as possible and additional files are not making anything simpler. But as I said git and git-buildpackage are not my best skills and so I can only quote our team policy http://debian-med.alioth.debian.org/docs/policy.html#debian-gbp.conf where this specific paragraph was written by Charles Plessy. In short: I would drop all unneeded variables from the rules file and be done. Feel free to pick a better solution that might fit your workflow best. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
