Mattia Rizzolo writes ("Bug#910687: dgit: crash with perl backtrace"):
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 11:51:24AM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > That seems coherent. Unless you think --include-dirty should turn
> > --clean=check into --clean=none ? That seems unwise.
>
> ACK
>
> > Consider --clean=dpkg-source --ignore-dirty, which means to run the
> > rules clean target and then tolerate uncommitted stuff.
>
> That's -wd/-wdd. Mhh, You have a point here, I should try that in the
> future. I like -wc because it's impossibly quick and usually it's the
> state I find myself in while working.
Err, sorry, when I said "consider" I meant "think about this case in
the context of the interaction between --clean=* and --ignore-dirty".
Not "please think about using -wd yourself".
-wd is v. annoying :-). It's slow and with anyone else's package it's
likely to be buggy too. Now that we have version control and *ignore
files, clean targets in makefiles are IMO obsolete.
> > I think this is because the algorithm used by dgit for quilt
> > linearisation implicitly assumes that it can use the
> > debian/source/format from your git tree. I think trying to work with
> > an uncommitted change to debian/source/format is sufficiently weird
> > that I don't mind that it goes wrong.
>
> That's a fair assumption.
> You mentioned somewhere that you could add at least a warning when
> d/source/format has uncommitted changes (or is present but untracked).
> I think I would find that useful.
OK, thanks for the feedback. I'll see if that is straightforward.
> > --include-dirty, maybe something like this:
> >
> > Changes not committed to git are not taken into account by dgit's
> > quilt fixup (see `FORMAT 3.0 (QUILT)' in dgit(7). So you may need
> > to run dpkg-source --commit yourself.
> >
> > ?
>
> I must admit that I haven't recently read dgit's documnetation (as I did
> last year, and costantly re-reading documentation you already read is
> quite boring), so I wouldn't have noticed.
> But perhaps making that point explicit could help others in the future.
Hah :-). Thanks for your input.
Ian.
