On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 09:15:41PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, 06 Jun 2011, Guillem Jover wrote: > > And to me that's one of the problems with Build-Options/Features, > > another being the duplicated information. If we consider > > build-arch/build-indep something useful enough to be widely usable > > on all packages producing arch:any + arch:all packages, then making > > this optional is close to keeping status quo, I expect a multi-year > > period to make a dent on packages adding support for this, if at all. > > That's true but so is it for any new feature unfortunately. And even with > a flag day, once you have fixed the FTBFS, you're far from having benefits > from that separation. Because most of the packages that do not FTBFS are > still not converted to make usage of it. They would still run the same > build process in both cases.
One thought I had today was what will happen with packages using either cdbs or dh. Both of these provide build-arch and build-indep rules, and as a result both can build using those targets today (though individual packages may of course be broken if they did things in the wrong rules). However, each would require updating individually to actually enable their use. Autodetection here would prevent the need for this. Would it be possible to combine both autodetection /and/ build features? That is, enable if in build features or if autodetected. This would provide convenience for developers if autodetection works (which will for the vast majority of packages), but would also permit manual enabling where it does not. This would allow the "make -qn" check to supplement Bill's work quite nicely, and make for much less work for maintainers (less packages needing NMUing with the build feature added). 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.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
