On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 03:45:14PM +0200, Mehdi Dogguy wrote: > Julian Andres Klode wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 03:13:14PM +0200, Mehdi Dogguy wrote: > >> Paul Wise wrote: > >>> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 1:03 AM, Julian Andres Klode <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > >>> > >>>>> Description : debhelper add-on to call autoreconf and clean up after the build > >>>>> > >>>>> Package: dh-autoreconf > >>> I'd suggest just putting this into debhelper rather than making it a > >>> separate package. > >>> > >> Is there any advantage to have it packaged? > >> > >> AIUI, you have to add a build-dependency anyway and change at least one > >> line in the debian/rules to call dh-autoreconf. Well, that line could > >> simply call autoreconf (or whatever) which even makes debian/rules clearer. > > > > The difference is that dh_autoreconf calls autoreconf and stores a list > > of the changes and the changed files are then removed in the clean > > target. If you just call autoreconf, the changes end up in the diff; > > and this is not what we want. > > > > I do use autoreconf and I don't have these changes in my diff. A 'debuild; debuild' should have a different result than a single debuild then. If you build from a clean directory, the first build will contain no changes. But after the build, the directory is not clean anymore and debian/rules clean does not do enough to keep the changes from appearing in the source package if you build again. > > IMO, a backup/restore script (where you specify the list of files to > backup) may be more useful. It would be called before build and when cleaning. I don't think so, it requires you to keep track of the files and you may miss some. -- Julian Andres Klode - Debian Developer, Ubuntu Member See http://wiki.debian.org/JulianAndresKlode and http://jak-linux.org/.
Description: PGP signature