On 8 Jan 1999, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > Jules> We should simply make dpkg-buildpackage more flexible (so > Jules> that, for example, in the event you don't want a whole build, > Jules> you can specify a target - if we don't already have this > Jules> functionality). > > *Chuckle*. Am I the only on here that remembers > dpkg-buildpackage as a new fangled thing? Traditionally, one did it > all by hand (invoking the targets in ./debian/rules, I mean). I think > if one needs to call a few targets, one may invode ./debian/rules > directly.
Curiously, Manoj, although I'm a complete newbie, I don't use dpkg-buildpackage. I also almost invariably use debian/rules <target>. However, from a technical point of view it seems to me that it is reasonable to require that debian/rules <target> is run in a certain environment (as we already expect that binary will require root privs, but require that build not need root privs). Furthermore, it seems reasonable to provide a tool for creating that environment. Further even to that, I was suggesting that dpkg-buildpackage might be the right tool to modify for this job. The ability to invoke debian/rules <target> by hand is not really a 'technical advantage', though convenient. I'm sure I would quickly get used to dpkg-buildpackage <target>, which is only a few characters longer ;) That said, perhaps dpkg-buildpackage isn't the appropriate place. I'd suggest 'debmake', but that was used once before, for a very different purpose. Jules /----------------+-------------------------------+---------------------\ | Jelibean aka | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 6 Evelyn Rd | | Jules aka | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Richmond, Surrey | | Julian Bean | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | TW9 2TF *UK* | +----------------+-------------------------------+---------------------+ | War doesn't demonstrate who's right... just who's left. | | When privacy is outlawed... only the outlaws have privacy. | \----------------------------------------------------------------------/
