On 14 Feb 1999, James Troup wrote: > Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Sun, Feb 07, 1999 at 10:43:47PM +0000, James Troup wrote: > > > No, the build target should be present and should do something, > > > i.e. build the package. Even if it only depends on the two other > > > build targets, it should still build stuff. > > > > No, section 3.2.1 of the packaging manual says that it is acceptable > > for the build target to do nothing. > > Thanks for being the third person to point that out. I was wrong, > sorry. > > The point I was trying to make, however, remains valid. > `dpkg-buildpackage -rwhatever' should successfully build all > components of a package (and if policy contradicts that, it needs > fixed, period). If you want to invoke policy and build the two > components only on `binary' that's fine by me, as it won't break when > compiling for m68k, but it seems more sensible to me to have a dummy > build target which does both build targets, simply on the grounds of > least surprise, but also because I can't see any reason _not_ to.
And conversely, of course there is at least one technical reason to prefer doing all the build in the 'build' target - the 'binary' target may be run as root (more likely fakeroot, I admit, but possibly actual root). It seems to me that policy should be changed, here. Jules /----------------+-------------------------------+---------------------\ | Jelibean aka | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 6 Evelyn Rd | | Jules aka | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Richmond, Surrey | | Julian Bean | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | TW9 2TF *UK* | +----------------+-------------------------------+---------------------+ | War doesn't demonstrate who's right... just who's left. | | When privacy is outlawed... only the outlaws have privacy. | \----------------------------------------------------------------------/
