Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?

2008-01-19 Thread Raphael Hertzog
On Sat, 13 Oct 2007, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: 1) Build-Options field As pointed out this doesn't scale very well and there is no real way to make it default behaviour one day. This would be the way to go though if it only needs to be specified for few packages (either because we think that

Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?

2007-10-17 Thread Simon Richter
Hi, Frank Lichtenheld schrieb: 3) Autodetection My approach would be to have the autobuilders use build-arch, and if that fails within 60 seconds, clean and build. If build-arch is not implemented, it fails rather quickly, so we use build and make a note in the build log. Later, one can

Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?

2007-10-12 Thread Frank Lichtenheld
On Sat, Sep 29, 2007 at 10:09:19PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: On Mon, Jul 02, 2007 at 09:26:23PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: Attached is a patch to dpkg which implements a check for a 'build-arch' target using 'make -f debian/rules -qn build-arch'. Is there actually a defined

Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?

2007-10-12 Thread Steve Langasek
On Fri, Oct 12, 2007 at 10:49:13PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: On Sat, Sep 29, 2007 at 10:09:19PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: On Mon, Jul 02, 2007 at 09:26:23PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: Attached is a patch to dpkg which implements a check for a 'build-arch' target using 'make

Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?

2007-10-12 Thread Frank Lichtenheld
On Fri, Oct 12, 2007 at 02:13:49PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: On Fri, Oct 12, 2007 at 10:49:13PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: No answer? I would like to work on this, but someone would need to answer my questions about it... (explicetly sending to vorlon, too, ignoring the M-F-T)

Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?

2007-09-29 Thread Frank Lichtenheld
On Mon, Jul 02, 2007 at 09:26:23PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: Attached is a patch to dpkg which implements a check for a 'build-arch' target using 'make -f debian/rules -qn build-arch'. Is there actually a defined semantic for make -qn ? The make info manual states: It is an error to use

Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?

2007-07-17 Thread Goswin von Brederlow
Wouter Verhelst [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Fri, Jun 29, 2007 at 11:11:04PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote: One of the issue is that tools like sbuild and pbuilder which want to take advantage of the Build-Depends-Indep split needs to know whether dpkg-buildpackage will call debian/rules build

Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?

2007-07-10 Thread Ian Jackson
Russ Allbery writes (Re: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?): Lo?c Minier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Why not promote these to requirements in a particular policy version instead? I fear we will have to list 10 Build-Options in all packages in a couple of years. This is a

Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?

2007-07-05 Thread Goswin von Brederlow
Wouter Verhelst [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Mon, Jul 02, 2007 at 03:28:05PM +0200, Simon Richter wrote: Running debian-rules can always have side effects and can actively rely on them so a --has-target can not be implemented cleanly in make. I am proposing hooking into the logic that

Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?

2007-07-04 Thread Simon Richter
Hi, Ian Jackson wrote: We want the package to _declare_ whether it supports this new target. Ideally, we'd want all packages to support the new target, and then turn that into policy, otherwise we'll end up supporting both for a very long time. The proposed -Options field will actually

Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?

2007-07-04 Thread Simon Richter
Hi, Wouter Verhelst wrote: $(shell ls temp-target-* rm temp-target-*): Yes, that's broken, but there are your side effects, and you'll have to run this code if you want to make your --has-target work. Yes, that is exactly what I'm proposing. The same thing happens for -q mode now.

Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?

2007-07-04 Thread Lucas Nussbaum
On 02/07/07 at 21:26 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: Lucas has agreed to doing a full archive rebuild with a modified dpkg-dev, for comparison with the previous test. A dpkg-dev binary including this change can be found at http://people.debian.org/~vorlon/dpkg-dev_1.14.4-0.1_all.deb. Hi, Here

Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?

2007-07-03 Thread Adam Borowski
On Mon, Jul 02, 2007 at 09:26:23PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: I believe the attached patch has the following characteristics: - Behavior on systems where 'make' is not GNU make is undefined. Specifically, on such a system dpkg is likely to either conclude that /all/ packages support

Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?

2007-07-03 Thread Steve Langasek
On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 09:54:03AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote: On Mon, Jul 02, 2007 at 09:26:23PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: I believe the attached patch has the following characteristics: - Behavior on systems where 'make' is not GNU make is undefined. Specifically, on such a system

Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?

2007-07-03 Thread Ian Jackson
Simon Richter writes (Re: Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?): The entire issue circles around not being able to reliably detect whether the target is present using a simple script. But who said it has to be a script? We want the package to _declare_ whether

Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?

2007-07-03 Thread Ian Jackson
Steve Langasek writes (Re: Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?): Attached is a patch to dpkg which implements a check for a 'build-arch' target using 'make -f debian/rules -qn build-arch'. Why are we so resistant to the new debian/control field ? That doesn't

Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?

2007-07-03 Thread Steve Langasek
On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 06:07:54PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: Steve Langasek writes (Re: Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?): Attached is a patch to dpkg which implements a check for a 'build-arch' target using 'make -f debian/rules -qn build-arch'. Why are we

Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?

2007-07-03 Thread Sam Hocevar
On Tue, Jul 03, 2007, Steve Langasek wrote: So, an idea: what about checking make -f /dev/null blah 2/dev/null first, for some portability? What 'blah' are you planning to use that's guaranteed to not have broken side-effects in some cases on Debian packages? How about:

Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?

2007-07-03 Thread Adam Borowski
On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 10:01:47AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 09:54:03AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote: So, an idea: what about checking make -f /dev/null blah 2/dev/null first, for some portability? What 'blah' are you planning to use that's guaranteed to not have

Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?

2007-07-03 Thread Wouter Verhelst
On Fri, Jun 29, 2007 at 11:11:04PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote: One of the issue is that tools like sbuild and pbuilder which want to take advantage of the Build-Depends-Indep split needs to know whether dpkg-buildpackage will call debian/rules build or build-arch. It needs to know no such

Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?

2007-07-03 Thread Wouter Verhelst
On Mon, Jul 02, 2007 at 03:28:05PM +0200, Simon Richter wrote: Running debian-rules can always have side effects and can actively rely on them so a --has-target can not be implemented cleanly in make. I am proposing hooking into the logic that ultimately decides that there is no such target

Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?

2007-07-02 Thread Simon Richter
Hi, Andreas Metzler wrote: --- Somehow make dpkg-buildpackage -B make use of the build-arch target if present. Either by detecting it automatically or by something like #229357. --- The entire issue circles around not being able to reliably detect whether the target

Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?

2007-07-02 Thread Goswin von Brederlow
Simon Richter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi, Andreas Metzler wrote: --- Somehow make dpkg-buildpackage -B make use of the build-arch target if present. Either by detecting it automatically or by something like #229357. --- The entire issue circles around not

Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?

2007-07-02 Thread Simon Richter
Hello, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: The seconds part requires that tools like sbuild and pbuilder know beforehand if build or build-arch will be used. For packages that do not implement build-arch, it is acceptable to call the build target with only B-D installed, because that is the way the

Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?

2007-07-02 Thread Steve Langasek
On Sun, Jul 01, 2007 at 05:22:31PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote: On Sat, Jun 30, 2007 at 09:40:29AM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote: I think that is just wrong. sbuild should not need to know anything about dpkg-buildpackage's internals and there is no need for change here. The currently used

Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?

2007-07-01 Thread Bill Allombert
On Sat, Jun 30, 2007 at 09:40:29AM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote: I think that is just wrong. sbuild should not need to know anything about dpkg-buildpackage's internals and there is no need for change here. The currently used and proven interface is: 1. install Build-Depends for running

Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?

2007-07-01 Thread Andreas Metzler
Bill Allombert wrote: On Sat, Jun 30, 2007 at 09:40:29AM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote: I think that is just wrong. sbuild should not need to know anything about dpkg-buildpackage's internals and there is no need for change here. The currently used and proven interface is: 1. install

Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?

2007-06-30 Thread Andreas Metzler
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] (gmane.linux.debian.devel.general) you wrote: On Fri, Jun 29, 2007 at 12:41:04AM +0300, Guillem Jover wrote: [...] I've been pondering on what's the cleanest way to fix it for some time, and I tend to agree with Steve about using the make options to test for the

Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?

2007-06-29 Thread Bill Allombert
On Fri, Jun 29, 2007 at 12:41:04AM +0300, Guillem Jover wrote: Obviously the dpkg developers are rather busy at the moment. I think that the right thing to do is to offer to NMU. Errr, what's the rush now to get this fixed? It's something that has been there like forever, the bug report

Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?

2007-06-28 Thread Guillem Jover
Hi, On Tue, 2007-06-26 at 14:33:26 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: Bill Allombert writes (Re: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?): At least, I would feel less alone. FWIW, I agree with you. I think the proposed `Build-Options' source control field is a sensible addition and

Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?

2007-06-27 Thread Loïc Minier
On Tue, Jun 26, 2007, Joey Hess wrote: I think it would also be useful to include 'nostrip' and 'noopt' in the Build-Options field, as a way to indicate that the package implements those DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS. I also have some Evil Plans for other things that can go in Build-Options, but they're

Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?

2007-06-27 Thread Russ Allbery
Loïc Minier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Tue, Jun 26, 2007, Joey Hess wrote: I think it would also be useful to include 'nostrip' and 'noopt' in the Build-Options field, as a way to indicate that the package implements those DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS. I also have some Evil Plans for other things

Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?

2007-06-26 Thread Ian Jackson
Bill Allombert writes (Re: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?): In 3 years and a half, I had the time to try all of that... So I will try something new: an online petition: If you would like bug #229357 to get an answer, please send a signed email to the buglog. Please,

Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?

2007-06-26 Thread Bill Allombert
On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 02:33:26PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: Bill Allombert writes (Re: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?): In 3 years and a half, I had the time to try all of that... So I will try something new: an online petition: If you would like bug #229357 to get

Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?

2007-06-26 Thread Joey Hess
Bill Allombert wrote: + The syntax is a list of options separated by + commas that are implemented in the build process. + The following options are defined: If commas are used as delimiters, it should use , as the delimiter for consistency with other fields using

Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?

2007-06-26 Thread Russ Allbery
Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I think it would also be useful to include 'nostrip' and 'noopt' in the Build-Options field, as a way to indicate that the package implements those DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS. parallel=n as well, while we're at it. -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?

2007-06-26 Thread Joey Hess
Ian Jackson wrote: While we are at it we should write a specification for Build-Options, something like: The Build-Options field appears (only) in the first stanza in debian/control. It gives a whitespace-separated list of options. The meanings of these options is defined in policy.