On Mon, Oct 20, 2003 at 12:35:04AM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 19, 2003 at 03:58:19PM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
> > I've yet to see a technical argument for allowing debian/rules to be a
> > non-makefile.
>
> I've yet to see a technical argument for disallowing debian/rules from be
On Mon, Oct 20, 2003 at 02:28:31PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> We might be more successful in resolving the issue if some people stopped
> thinking of it as an ad hominem flamewar. :p
Especially since Wichert don't bother playing :(
> > > The interface to the rules file is defined well enough,
>
On Mon, Oct 20, 2003 at 01:06:30AM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> Summary of the auction so far:
>
> Steve bet on Manoj and Josip on Wichert.
>
> Deuce.
We might be more successful in resolving the issue if some people stopped
thinking of it as an ad hominem flamewar. :p
> > The interface to th
On Mon, Oct 20, 2003 at 12:35:04AM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 19, 2003 at 03:58:19PM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
Summary of the auction so far:
Steve bet on Manoj and Josip on Wichert.
Deuce.
> The interface to the rules file is defined well enough, there's absolutely
> nothing wr
On Sun, Oct 19, 2003 at 03:58:19PM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
> I've yet to see a technical argument for allowing debian/rules to be a
> non-makefile.
I've yet to see a technical argument for disallowing debian/rules from being
a non-makefile.
See, those two statements make the same amount of
On 19-Oct-03, 13:03 (CDT), Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 19, 2003 at 11:50:41AM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
> > > But it's a historic injustice,
> >
> > Help! Help! I'm being repressed!
> > The Man is keeping me down!
> > Up with perl, down with make!
> > Power to the pe
On Sun, Oct 19, 2003 at 11:50:41AM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
> > But it's a historic injustice,
>
> Help! Help! I'm being repressed!
> The Man is keeping me down!
> Up with perl, down with make!
> Power to the people!
We share an enthusiasm for overloaded phrases, I see :)
but a small verbal
On 19-Oct-03, 04:20 (CDT), Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But it's a historic injustice,
Help! Help! I'm being repressed!
The Man is keeping me down!
Up with perl, down with make!
Power to the people!
Steve
--
Steve Greenland
The irony is that Bill Gates claims to be making
On Sun, Oct 19, 2003 at 01:20:26PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> I'd be interested to see doogie's rationale, but it's amusing enough as it
> stands, because the policy still says:
>
> If one or both of the targets `build-arch' and `build-indep' are
> not provided, then invoking
On Sun, Oct 19, 2003 at 12:18:51PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > this-and-that function of Make" (so far I remember only two of those, when
> > the DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS env. variable was added and when testing for existence
> > of build-arch was added).
>
> ... which was a fiasco. Doogie finally i
On Sun, Oct 19, 2003 at 11:20:33AM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> this-and-that function of Make" (so far I remember only two of those, when
> the DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS env. variable was added and when testing for existence
> of build-arch was added).
... which was a fiasco. Doogie finally implemented th
On Sat, Oct 18, 2003 at 04:37:45PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > 88029
>
> yeah well. That is not all the dfiscussion there was on it. In
> March 2001, we had more than those comments on it:
Nah, I saw that one as well, and I'm fairly sure I answered it back then.
If not, please let m
12 matches
Mail list logo