Re: RFS: frown
On (16/09/06 09:12), Arjan Oosting wrote:
> Op za, 16-09-2006 te 00:13 +0100, schreef James Westby:
> > * debian/dirs is redundant here.
> Huh? Why is it redundant? The upstream Makefile does not create
> $(bindir) so I debian/dirs to make sure usr/bin exists.
Sorry. debian/dirs is not redundant here. It usually is with just
usr/bin or similar in it. I will be sure to check more thoroughly in future.
> I don't think these two changes require a new upload, but the changes
> will be included in 0.6.1-3.
I agree with that.
> > I have a couple of questions if you could answer them for me, (purely
> > out of interest
> > You have gone with cdbs handling debian/control. This is unpopular, can
> > you tell me why you chose it?
> Well it is very bad manners to do this on build time and the ftp-masters
> will reject the package if it does this.
Yes I realise that. Though I don't think a REJECTED mail is strong
enough for this!
> > The update-haskell-control stuff seems unecessary to me (I realise it is
> > not your choice.) Can you tell me why it is done like this?
> Well it substitutes some Haskell related variables (right build
> dependencies on ghc6, list of ghc6 arches etc) which can be especially
> usefull if the package contains a Haskell library. But right now I only
> use it to keep track of the list of Architectures frown can be build
I was more asking why it added a list of architectures. Almost every
other package gets by with arch: any. It is also recommended to only
restrict the architectures for very specific reasons, does that apply to
James Westby -- GPG Key ID: B577FE13 -- http://jameswestby.net/
seccure key - (3+)k7|M*edCX/.A:n*N!>|&7U.L#9E)Tu)T0>AM - secp256r1/nistp256