David R. Morrison wrote:
Daniel Macks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Debian Packaging Manual 5.7 "User-defined fields" (though as I read it
is self-contradictory), suggests we could maybe pass the BDO flag in
the control file? If so, that would certainly be a cleaner solution than:
For each package,
Daniel Macks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Debian Packaging Manual 5.7 "User-defined fields" (though as I read it
> is self-contradictory), suggests we could maybe pass the BDO flag in
> the control file? If so, that would certainly be a cleaner solution than:
>
> > For each package, at build time
On Sun, May 30, 2004 at 11:33:20AM -0400, David R. Morrison wrote:
> Dear Fink developers,
>
> For some time, I've wanted to have a way to validate that packages are
> using the BuildDependsOnly field correctly. The test I want to employ
> is this: if the package installs anything into /sw/includ
> It would also make it straightforward
> to be able to rebuild a .deb later even if the original .info file has
> gone missing.
Well, almost. The problem is, you also need the correct version of the
.patch file to rebuild the .deb. And .patch files can get very large,
so I'm pretty sure we *don
Actually, I like the idea of including the .info in the .deb. It seems
more future-proof than a one-time hack like making a BuildDependsOnly
dir. Having the .info would make it possibly to do a lot more
validation on the .deb than before (e.g. did all of the Files: entries
make it into the sp
