On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 06:23:55PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote: > On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 09:53:46AM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > So according to your rule that policy should standardize "common practice" > > and not mandate something completely new, the env variable proposal is in > > more widespread usage. > > For ten years, the "common practice" was that dpkg-buildpackage did not set > any variable. > > We cannot standardize on the "env variable proposal" because such proposal > has never be made. Instead dpkg-buildpackage was broken in Lenny, and should > be fixed ASAP. Now we have packages that do not build correctly with > dpkg-buildpackage, others that do not build correctly with debian/rules > binary, and all handle env var differently.
Exactly. dpkg-buildpackage setting environment variables is broken. Using make to set site/distro/user-specific options makes more sense. Not only is it more flexible and extensible, it will also work no matter how one builds the package since make will handle it. Regards, Roger -- .''`. Roger Leigh : :' : Debian GNU/Linux http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/ `. `' Printing on GNU/Linux? http://gutenprint.sourceforge.net/ `- GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848 Please GPG sign your mail. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
