Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb: > On Mon, Mar 22, 2004 at 03:19:55PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote: >> - In the install target, you would call something like >> >> $(MAKE) install prefix=debian/tmp/usr > > It's easier to use DESTDIR=$(CURDIR)/debian/tmp if DESTDIR support is > available; that way you get less confused by /etc.
Ah, you're right. The last package I prepared from scratch doesn't install anything into /etc anyway, and my only alone-maintained package uses it. Hm, how do I know (other by trial and error) whether a package supports this? autoconf'iscated ones do not use it generally, do they? >> - From a policy point of view, it doesn't hurt to call clean before >> debian/rules binary, but if you do that, I'd do it in debian/rules, >> not by hand. However, I recommend not to do it. > > I'd call it a bug to do that. I believe the buildds, and certainly > dpkg-buildpackage, do something morally equivalent to 'debian/rules > build && fakeroot debian/rules binary'. Didn't think about buildds. Only about human ones, also called maintainer_in_debugging_building_cycle. > > Use dpkg-buildpackage (or debuild, a wrapper around it which sorts out > fakeroot and the like) rather than 'debian/rules binary'. The last is a remark to the OP's question, not to me, right? Because that's what I meant: Don't make binary depend on clean, because it enables you to delete exactly what you want and then run the binary target, and dpkg-buildpackage will run clean, anyway. Regards, Frank -- Frank Küster, Biozentrum der Univ. Basel Abt. Biophysikalische Chemie
