Hello, On Wed 18 Jun 2025 at 07:07pm -07, Xiyue Deng wrote:
> Ah didn't think about that. I think it's better than using control.in > in general, though there are the "unused" warning on other packages > (using "?=" doesn't seem to help). I don't follow. > One advantage of generating d/control that I like is that we can see the > provide list directly and can inspect the diff on regeneration. To get > something similar, I have each package version pair as one line of > comment in the substvars file before setting emacs:Provides (the > substitute variable I'm using for now). This way we get something > similar. True. > Somehow I cannot use debian/substvars or debian/<package>.substvars > (which probably got removed by "clean") and need to use > override_dh_gencontrol to pass the generated substvars file (I'm using > debian/emacs-substvars). Let me know if there is a better way. I don't know how to do it off the top of my head, either. But I'm sure it can be done. Look at how dh_elpa does it, I guess? >> I see you're using package--builtin-versions. I'm not happy to be using >> an internal variable -- it got us in trouble before! >> > > Current there seems to be no way to get the builtin package info > otherwise. Fortunately we can easily verify whether it still works by > running "debian/rules debian-sync" and inspect the diff in > debian/emacs-substvars. > > Meanwhile I'll try to file a wishlist bug upstream and migrate in > future. I'm not up for merging that, I'm afraid. I think we need a public function first. -- Sean Whitton
