Re: Confused by <foo>.dirs, <foo>.install etc
On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 10:06 AM, Daniel Moerner <dmoerner@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 4:57 PM, Jack Kelly <endgame.dos@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 9:40 AM, Sune Vuorela <nospam@vuorela.dk> wrote:
>>> On 2009-05-24, Jack Kelly <endgame.dos@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 8:07 AM, Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>> I have a problem building a library, starting with a dh_make template.
>>>>> The basic problem seems to boil down to files don't get moved from
>>>>> DESTDIR (debian/tmp) into the actual packages, so the final *.deb
>>>>> packages are empty.
>>>>>
>>>>> It seems like the <foo>.dirs and <foo>.install files in debian/ are
>>>>> something to do with this process. However I cannot find where in
>>>>> Debian policy these are documented ...
>>>>
>>>> My suggestion: If CDBS supports your package's build system, use it.
>>>> http://build-common.alioth.debian.org/cdbs-doc.html . It calls all the
>>>
>>> Please do not suggest debian/rules obfuscators, wether it is cdbs nor
>>> dh(1), to newcomers wanting to learn packaging.
>>
>> Okay, will do. Can you please explain your reasoning, though? On the
>> surface, it seems analogous to "Please do not suggest Makefile/sh
>> obfuscators, whether it is autotools nor cmake(1), to newcomers
>> wanting to learn how to build software.".
>
> I'm not sure if there's really a problem with that statement either,
> you really should know the basics of how GNU make works with regard to
> PHONY targets and the like before you jump into using autotools or
> cmake in my opinion.
>
> In any case, the reason to not use obfuscators here is because they
> don't solve the problem: they won't know what to install any more than
> a manual call to dh_install. At least using the manual call to
> dh_install will help teach why this is the case.
Both you and Sune make a lot of sense. Thanks for clarifying.
-- Jack
Reply to: