Re: Bug#88029: Package which uses jam (instead make)

2003-10-21 Thread Branden Robinson
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

Re: Bug#88029: Package which uses jam (instead make)

2003-10-20 Thread Bill Allombert
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, >

Re: Bug#88029: Package which uses jam (instead make)

2003-10-20 Thread Josip Rodin
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

Re: Bug#88029: Package which uses jam (instead make)

2003-10-19 Thread Bill Allombert
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

Re: Bug#88029: Package which uses jam (instead make)

2003-10-19 Thread Josip Rodin
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

Re: Bug#88029: Package which uses jam (instead make)

2003-10-19 Thread Steve Greenland
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

Re: Bug#88029: Package which uses jam (instead make)

2003-10-19 Thread Josip Rodin
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

Re: Bug#88029: Package which uses jam (instead make)

2003-10-19 Thread Steve Greenland
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

Re: Bug#88029: Package which uses jam (instead make)

2003-10-19 Thread Bill Allombert
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

Re: Bug#88029: Package which uses jam (instead make)

2003-10-19 Thread Josip Rodin
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

Re: Bug#88029: Package which uses jam (instead make)

2003-10-19 Thread Bill Allombert
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

Re: Bug#88029: Package which uses jam (instead make)

2003-10-19 Thread Josip Rodin
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