Zach Garner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > First: > 1. The sheer number of helper scripts, with layers and layers of > scripts built on top of each other is really confusing.
Hm? Do you mean the debhelper scripts? Those significantly help simplify the writing of debian/rules. Of course, if you don't like them, you don't have to use them. > 2. The number of files that I have to create within the /debian > directory is difficult to deal with, and having to create the /debian > directory within my application directory and being forced to name my > application directory according to debian rules is very irritating. Only a couple files in debian/ are actually required. No one forces you to name your directory anything. > 3. Most of the package creation scripts (I'm refering explicitly to > dh_make which is supposed to be the proper way of creating a package, as > discussed in the New Maintainer's Guide) expect that you are building a > traditional unix application, that's written in C, has ./configure and a > Makefile. All we are doing in most of our packages is installing some > files. Why can't that be simple? It can be. dh_make is pretty crappy a lot of the time. Either undo its damage or just don't use it to begin with. > Second, why can't I create packages with standard unix commands? Why > can't I say something like: > $ tar cvzf data.tgz myapplication/* > $ tar czvf control.tgz control > $ tar czvf mypackage-0.1.deb data.tgz control.tgz I don't know. Why can't you? Those no reason you shouldn't be able to built a .deb by hand. -- Blast you and your estrogenical treachery! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
