[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Manoj Srivastava) wrote on 01.03.01 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >>"Alex" == Alexander Hvostov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Alex> It can be done the easy way, or the hard way. What you described is > the Alex> hard way. Why can't it be done the easy way? > > If people really think that calling scripts from Makefiles is > hard, should they really be maintaining Debian packages? No. Or maybe make that "Hell, NO!". > So far, the arguments I have heard for removing this > restrictions have been > a) This new mechanism is so cool > b) Makefiles can be really hard to write!! > c) Why not? > > I guess my objection to this reduction of standardization is > that there should be some inertia in policy, and that we need to see > some stronger technical reasons to break the following practices: > > i) make -n -p -f ./debian/rules > ii) in ./makefile: include ./debian/rules > change targets and or rules, and spit out some things set in > ./debian/rules (I actually did this for debugging a rules file) > > Yes, pretty arcane; but I contend that this argument is no > weaker than any I have seen in support of this proposal. Exactly what I think. > change for the sake of change is not a good idea for policies in general !!! MfG Kai
