On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 05:50:08PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:

>> We could probably call python-support in the rules file, if it's not
>> done automagically by cdbs. ;)
> I certainly recommend to use one of thos Python install systems, not try  
> to outsmart them.
> Doing so with CDBS goes roughly like this:
>  * Include CDBS class python-module.mk
>  * Declare above CDBS inclusions which Python install system to use
>  * Add proper ${python:*} variables to control file
>  * Follow documentation of the chosen Python install system on what    
> other hints is needed
>  * Update build dependencies

I completely agree, this sounds reasonable. (I don't have the slightest
clue about python packaging, so handing this over to those tools might
be a good idea).

> Fair enough - if not a module then it need not be packaged separately,  
> but packaging still needs to follow Python Policy.

Are we violating the policy? I must admit I haven't read the

As far as I can tell, it's working, lintian isn't complaining, it has
the right build- and runtime-dependencies and it probably has the right
paths, too, though I'm not entirely sure about the last one.

If you feel we need to change something, please do so. It would take me
ten times longer to sort out all the nuances imposed by the policy I
haven't read, time that's better spent on actually coding something
useful. ;) (e.g. the FFADO-FTBFS-gcc-4.5, which I fixed this afternoon.
I'm pushing this upstream and then update to a new svn version


mail: a...@thur.de      http://adi.thur.de      PGP/GPG: key via keyserver

pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list

Reply via email to