On Sep 05, 2011, at 10:24 PM, David Spence wrote: >Firstly, thank you for the replies: it's the response to even the daftest >question which keeps the community flourishing. To those who've replied: you >have reinforced my faith in Debian and Python.
Awesome! I'm glad we were helpful. >Barry, thanks for the pointer to flufl.enum and its package files. Prior to >your guidance I was stuck on an unexpected blocker: all my other hand-created >Debian packages have had a Makefile and to start with this one did too. At >the time it was sans install target and my Debian package was built >"successfully" - though it never contained my Python source text!? The root >cause of my frustration was that my package build was silently successful >with rules "dh @ --with python2". I twigged the cause at 04:30 this >morning. What got me past my sticking point was the absence of a Makefile >from flufl.enum. Honestly, I thought I was doing something seriously wrong - >I wasn't expecting the presence of a simple Makefile to be the answer! Yep, if you have a Makefile, you'll need to add `--buildsystem python_distutils` to your dh call. Generally, I've found less use for the Makefiles these days, so I tend to remove them from the upstream source. >So, thank you for the replies and sorry for the exposure to my bluster. > >I will live up to my promise to document what I've done step-by-step to >complement what's already out there. Pls bear with me. No problem! Let us know when you've published your documentation. -Barry
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
