On (16/09/06 09:12), Arjan Oosting wrote: > Op za, 16-09-2006 te 00:13 +0100, schreef James Westby: > > * debian/dirs is redundant here. > Huh? Why is it redundant? The upstream Makefile does not create > $(bindir) so I debian/dirs to make sure usr/bin exists. >
Sorry. debian/dirs is not redundant here. It usually is with just usr/bin or similar in it. I will be sure to check more thoroughly in future. > > I don't think these two changes require a new upload, but the changes > will be included in 0.6.1-3. I agree with that. > > > I have a couple of questions if you could answer them for me, (purely > > out of interest > > You have gone with cdbs handling debian/control. This is unpopular, can > > you tell me why you chose it? > Well it is very bad manners to do this on build time and the ftp-masters > will reject the package if it does this. Yes I realise that. Though I don't think a REJECTED mail is strong enough for this! > > The update-haskell-control stuff seems unecessary to me (I realise it is > > not your choice.) Can you tell me why it is done like this? > Well it substitutes some Haskell related variables (right build > dependencies on ghc6, list of ghc6 arches etc) which can be especially > usefull if the package contains a Haskell library. But right now I only > use it to keep track of the list of Architectures frown can be build > on. I was more asking why it added a list of architectures. Almost every other package gets by with arch: any. It is also recommended to only restrict the architectures for very specific reasons, does that apply to Haskell? Thanks, James -- James Westby -- GPG Key ID: B577FE13 -- http://jameswestby.net/ seccure key - (3+)k7|M*edCX/.A:n*N!>|&7U.L#9E)Tu)T0>AM - secp256r1/nistp256 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
