Quoting Emilien Klein (2012-12-09 21:06:21) > 2012/12/9 Jonas Smedegaard <d...@jones.dk>: > > <advertising> > > CDBS makes it quite easy to strip+repackage files - feel free to ask for > > a demo if interested in that... > > </advertisement> > > Nice try ;) > Is there some page that compares short-form dh and CDBS, that would > show me the benefits of switching to CDBS?
Good question. I am unaware of any direct, documented comparison.
Apart from the different syntax which you might hate or love or not care
much about, these are the main features of CDBS that I use which are not
in short-form dh:
* get-orig-source handling, including stripping and repackaging
* copyright and licensing tracking
* multi-flavor builds
* more flexible package relations
+ auto-resolve some build-dependencies
+ declare build- and binary relations in rules file, allowing
comments, conditionals (e.g. recommend if built with debugging
enabled) and expansions (e.g. Perl modules to lib*-perl).
I did the conversion of uglifyjs conversion in small steps, to ease
following the exact changes done:
debcheckout uglifyjs
cd uglifyjs
git log -p 1d72f3..2360ce
Step two is simply copying control file, replacing build-dependencies
with "@cdbs@".
- Jonas
--
* Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
* Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/
[x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
signature.asc
Description: signature
_______________________________________________ Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
