Julian, Remember that maintainer scripts aren't altogether uncommon, and writing shell scripts isn't any harder (by some assessments, easier) than Makefiles. For this reason, I would assume that most Debian developers are equally well versed in shell scripts.
Regards, Alex. --- PGP/GPG Fingerprint: EFD1 AC6C 7ED5 E453 C367 AC7A B474 16E0 758D 7ED9 -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.12 GCS/CM>CC/IT d- s:+ a16 C++(++++)>$ UL++++>$ P--- L++>++$ E+ W+(-) N+ o? K? w---() !O !M !V PS+(++)>+ PE-(--) Y+>+ PGP t+>++ !5 X-- R>++ tv(+) b+(++) DI(+) D++ G>+++ e--> h! !r y>+++ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ On Thu, 1 Mar 2001, Julian Gilbey wrote: > On Wed, Feb 28, 2001 at 05:28:33PM -0800, Alexander Hvostov wrote: > > Julian, > > > > Makefiles can be just as cryptic and difficult to maintain. For this > > reason, I don't really agree that using arbitrary code in debian/rules > > will make life any more difficult for anyone. It may make life easier, > > though. > > > > An example posted to debian-devel illustrated a greatly simplified > > debian/rules, by making it into a script. The point is that it can be > > done, and that it can be useful. > > Absolutely, but another example showed that it could equally produce > code which was really difficult for anyone not versed in shoop to > read. > > We expect our package maintainers to be reasonably familiar with > makefiles. debian/rules files are one of the few things around which > are pretty standard in the project. Yes, in some cases shell scripts > may be easier, but in general, I just grab a standard example rules > file and edit it to my needs. > > I dunno. I'm still not convinced either way. > > Julian > > -- > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > > Julian Gilbey, Dept of Maths, Queen Mary, Univ. of London > Debian GNU/Linux Developer, see http://people.debian.org/~jdg > Donate free food to the world's hungry: see http://www.thehungersite.com/ >
