Re: conditional d/rules resulting in different features b/t buster & stretch-backports?
On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 07:57:01AM +0000, Ian Campbell wrote:
>On Fri, 2019-01-04 at 00:21 -0700, Nicholas D Steeves wrote:
>> Hi Ian,
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 03, 2019 at 09:23:25AM +0000, Ian Campbell wrote:
>> > On Wed, 2019-01-02 at 17:20 -0700, Nicholas D Steeves wrote:
>> > > I maintain a backport (btrfs-progs) that will soon have different
>> > > features between buster and stretch-backports. It links with libzstd
>> > > [1] if a zstd udeb is available for the suite.
>> >
>> > Do you really mean udeb, as opposed to deb? I don't think backports
>> > cares about the installer/udeb environment much at all, in particular I
>> > thought there were no installer images built from backports suites (or
>> > maybe I'm wrong/outdated on that?).
>>
>> Yes, I really mean udeb ;-) because of this from d/rules:
>>
>> ZSTD := $(shell grep '^udeb: ' /var/lib/dpkg/info/libzstd*.shlibs)
>>
>> That build-time configuration was to enable libzstd support on Ubuntu
>> at a time when Debian did not yet have a libzstd udeb (but when Ubuntu
>> did). IIRC, without this udeb, btrfs-progs compiled with support for
>> zstd was nonfunctional in DI.
>
>But AIUI there is no DI built from backports, nor able to use udebs
>from backports, so it doesn't matter, does it?
Not *yet*, but Kibi and I have been playing with this for a while.
--
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. steve@einval.com
Is there anybody out there?
Reply to: