On Wed, 2007-04-18 at 10:59 +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote: > I'm wondering why you, as a 'novice deb builder', chose yada as a > packaging helper. I wouldn't recommend it to new packagers (or at all), > because it hides large parts of the build process.
Ah, but that's exactly why I chose it. I did start off trying dh scripts but thought it seemed like a lot of work for a simple install. I didn't discover yada until I got hold of the Martin Krafft Debian book, liked the look of the apparently cleaner approach and got something which seemed to work well very quickly. > You can see that right here: there's code generated that doesn't work, > but it's very opaque what does this, why, and how to change it. A look at an old .deb built with yada on sarge (where it worked fine wrt menus) shows it just contains if test -x /usr/bin/update-menus; then update-menus; fi Searching etch's /usr/bin/yada (perl) for update-menus finds "\nif [ \"$1\" = \"configure\" ] && ... the $1 is presumably being prematurely substituted when it should go into the postinst script intact. Aha... in fact a few lines later I can see some presumably correctly escaped "\nif [ \"\$1\" = \"configure\" ]; I've just put in a reportbug. My only options for fixing my debs immediately seems to be patching yada or unpacking the debs and patching the affected line. I'm not sure which is more horrible. > debhelper might lead to a longer debian/rules file, but it has the > advatages that you actually see which steps are taken in what order, and > that you can easily control what happens. Hmmm maybe I should give dh another go. Regards Tim -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
