[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Examples for CDDtool



On Tue, 28 Jun 2005, Sergio Talens-Oliag wrote:

 More news soon, back to coding... ;)
I just had a look into your examples and want to give some comments.
At first I want to say that you did a great job!

Now the comments:

  1) I really like the switch to cdbs!
     But why did you put some scripts to debian/build-tools of
     your actual CDD?  IMHO these tools can be used in common to
     all CDDs.  This would only require a minor change.  The only
     special thing is how you obtain the name of your CDD

CDD=`sed -n -e "/^Package: .*-cdd$/{ s/^Package: \(.*-cdd\)$/\1/; p }" $CONTROL \
     | head -1`

     It depends from the fact that the name of your CDD ends with "-cdd".
     My personal opinion is that a CDD should not contain "cdd" in its
     name.  You as a man has also a name different from Sergio-man
     (except like those strange things like Superman, Spiderman or
      Batman ;-) ).
     But because you depend on a name to find out the CDD name we have to find
     out another way.  My suggestion would be to source a file like

          build.conf

     which should be contained in every CDD source file and which would
     open some additional options.

     In any case we should put the common code of both scripts into a
     separate file and source this.

  2) I wonder if you do not want to implement a replacement for the
     cdd-common package.  The main issue of this package is the
     code which is necessary to implement the user menus.  If you
     don't mind I try to add this code to the cddtool package.  It
     will not hurd your stuff because we can implement it this way
     that the dependency will not be included if no user menu should
     be included.  But in my opinion the user menu is a very good
     way to support users and I would regard it as reasonable for
     any CDD.

What would you think about this?

Kind regards

          Andreas.


--
http://fam-tille.de



Reply to: