On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 09:58:41PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: > On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 19:10:05 +0100, Wookey wrote: > > > Should a package depending on this behaviour build-dep on a particular > > dpkg version? As it already works in build-essential in stable do the > > same rules apply as essential packages in stable (i.e no explicit > > dependency required)? That would be consistent. Maybe it's been doing > > it since forever? > > > A package may not depend on this behaviour. The interface to build a > package is still debian/rules, not dpkg-buildpackage.
While this might be the formal policy, isn't dpkg-buildpackage the /de-facto/ interface? AFAIK we don't actually test that building via debian/rules alone works, while we do test that building via dpkg-buildpackage works since this is what most packages build for upload, and all packages built on the autobuilders, use. Would there not be some advantage to making dpkg-buildpackge the interface for building? (Not dropping the debian/rules interface, of course.) This would permit the automatic setting of all the host- and build-related variables without requiring every package to also set them by hand. It would of course still be possible to build using debian/rules directly, but it wouldn't be required to set the flags. Without commenting on whether or not this is a good idea, isn't this basically the status quo already, given that most packages don't test direct usage of debian/rules, and manual setting of the various arch- and build-related variables is inconsistent? Regards, Roger -- .''`. Roger Leigh : :' : Debian GNU/Linux http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/ `. `' schroot and sbuild http://alioth.debian.org/projects/buildd-tools `- GPG Public Key F33D 281D 470A B443 6756 147C 07B3 C8BC 4083 E800 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120330130833.gj30...@codelibre.net
