On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 04:58:39PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > Paul Wise wrote: > > I note that you plan to modify the helper tools > > (debhelper/cdbs/yada/etc). I think that you will get better coverage > > by modifying dpkg-dev instead. Have you not considered that option or > > am I missing a disadvantage of it? > > I tried to think in another level that would cover more packages than helper > tools. The problem I see with dpkg-dev is that it's not "the way" to build > packages (you can simply call ./debian/rules binary AFAIK), and I'm not sure > where I would create them; I guess dpkg-gencontrol would be the most > appropriate > place, but we have the same problem than with helper tools: not every package > uses it. So I don't see any benefit with using dpkg-dev, and some problems > (like > packages being stripped when dpkg-dev is called as dpkg-buildpackage may not > have been used to build the package).
Maybe it is reasonable to expect the package gets built on the buildd? AIUI, this is the way Debian is heading anyway. So while it is not required to build a .deb via dpkg-buildpackage; .debs distributed by Debian will be at some point. Michael -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
