On 10 February 2010 21:11, Alan Pope <a...@popey.com> wrote: > On 10 February 2010 20:58, Liam Wilson <liamwilso...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Out of curiosity, can I ask why it's worse to package software in a .deb >> file in the long run? >> > > I think Anton was saying that it's worse to package binary debian > packages, not debian packages as a whole. We create source packages > which can be uploaded to (for example) launchpad PPAs, and built > (compiled) for multiple architectures including i386, AMD64, LPIA and > ARM. If you build binary packages then the onus is on you to rebuild > for other architectures.
That is indeed what I meant. Doing a debian source package allows you to rebuild easily and use the advanced features available through debian helper scripts. Creating the folder layouts and using dpkg-deb (or zipping it up manually) to build *only* the .deb without using the debian buildscripts may seem simple at first but has serious limitations, not least rebuilding for another architecture via a PPA or similar Anton -- Anton Piatek email: an...@piatek.co.uk blog/photos: http://www.strangeparty.com pgp: [74B1FA37] (http://www.strangeparty.com/anton.asc) fingerprint: 7401 96D3 E037 2F8F 5965 A358 4046 71FD 74B1 FA37 No trees were destroyed in the sending of this message, however, a significant number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced. -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
