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

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: signature

Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list

Reply via email to