On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 04:50:29PM +0200, Simon Richter wrote: > >Some issues seem to come up time and again when somebody inspects RFS'd > >packages. Some of these are not breaches of policy but simply bad > >practices, like leaving quoted dh_* commands in debian/rules. > I do that all the time. It is much easier to see that a program is not On Fri, May 05, 2006 at 12:33:53PM +0300, Jari Aalto wrote: > Whether someone thinks is "bad practise", the other may think it "more > maintainable".
Well, I must add that I don't find the recommendation very smart either, but probably there's somebody out there that has terrible difficulties in not reading commented-out lines or something like that. I personally find dh_make-generated rules files hard to read in general, mostly because the meaning of all those commands keeps changing and even many dh_* commands that are not commented out are not really doing anything worthwhile. Not that I would stop using dh_make, anyway: it would just be nice to have a list of things dh_make is most likely to leave wrong. Which, coincidentally, is something the "common errors" checklist will also cover. :) The reason I mentioned the "take out the outcommented lines" recommendation was that it really comes up often enough to belong to the checklist. I don't want to fight every small recommendation detail I find wrong; I got enough of that for a while with the native/non-native topic. Panu -- personal contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED], +35841 5323835 technical contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.iki.fi/atehwa/ PGP fingerprint: 0EA5 9D33 6590 FFD4 921C 5A5F BE85 08F1 3169 70EC -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
