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