On Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 02:17:36PM -0600, Bill Allombert wrote: > On Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 07:45:10PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote: > > The difference between the two is that -q checks whether a target is > > uptodate and return an appropriate exit code, while -p prints out the > > data base (i.e. the rules and variables) that results from reading the > > Makefile. The latter seems more robust to me, so we should reevaluate > > the "It is *not* possible *at all* to detect available targets in a > > rules file." assertion, IMHO. > > I would strongly suggest you to consider the "Build-Options: build-arch" > solution I proposed that is going to be much more robust than any > parsing of debian/rules.
And I would strongly suggest you to consider Simon Richter's proposal, which sounds a lot cleaner to me: if you have build-depends-indep in your debian/control file, you must also implement build-arch and/or build-indep. Additionally, that has the advantage that most packages probably already implement it that way. -- .../ -/ ---/ .--./ / .--/ .-/ .../ -/ ../ -./ --./ / -.--/ ---/ ..-/ .-./ / -/ ../ --/ ./ / .--/ ../ -/ ..../ / -../ ./ -.-./ ---/ -../ ../ -./ --./ / --/ -.--/ / .../ ../ --./ -./ .-/ -/ ..-/ .-./ ./ .-.-.-/ / --/ ---/ .-./ .../ ./ / ../ .../ / ---/ ..-/ -/ -../ .-/ -/ ./ -../ / -/ ./ -.-./ ..../ -./ ---/ .-../ ---/ --./ -.--/ / .-/ -./ -.--/ .--/ .-/ -.--/ .-.-.-/ / ...-.-/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
