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

Re: Examples for CDDtool

El Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 02:26:15PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard va escriure:
> >>  anyway it has the same solution as before, if you want to use a
> >> description
> >>  file different than "desc/all" you can put:
> >>
> >>    export DESC=tasks/all
> > 
> > Great flexibility, but I would prefer to use just the default in my
> > packages
> > (whatever it is).
> With the attached cdbs file (both plain file and diff attached - don't
> know what you prefer), default DESC is applied except when overridden
> like this (which is common cdbs style):

  Nice, I'll change it to work that way, looks more cdbs-ish... ;)

> > I convinced you to the common cdbs script for cddtk when you were not
> > absolutely
> > sure about it, but once this is in a dependency would make sense, IMHO.
> I feel pretty much at home with cdbs (I wrote the python file you borrow
> from :-) ), so tell me what you want and I'll do the coding for you. :-)
> As an example I believe debscripts/cdbs-helper is better incorporated
> into cdbs/cddtk-meta.mk itself: cdbs scripts are supposed to not pull in
> dependencies on their own.

  I didn't knew anything about that policy, but the script will always depend
  on the cddtool and the 'cdbs-helper' (a very poor name choice, BTW) is
  included with it, so I don't really see the difference.
  My initial idea was to have something like a set of debhelper scripts for
  the cddtk,  implemented directly on the cddtool, but as that implied a lot
  of changes in a given moment I ended up puting toghether a couple of shell
  scripts as a temporary solution, that have ended up in the current
  Anyway, my idea was to allow the use of the helper scripts without cdbs, as
  some people may prefer to use them directly. Probably the solution is to
  include the functionality on the cddtool or fix the current scripts and turn
  them into a set of dh_ like scripts.
> Oh, and I suggest renaming from "cddtk-meta.mk" to just "cdd.mk" as the
> cdbs names usually relate to the target area rather than the specifik
> tool to get there (like "perlmodule" instead of "makemaker-pm", and
> "kde.mk").

  What about 'cddtk.mk'? I believe is good to indicate that the rules are for
  the cddtk, as we already have other tools related to cdd that won't be
  supported by this rules file.

Sergio Talens-Oliag <sto@debian.org>   <http://people.debian.org/~sto/>
Key fingerprint = 29DF 544F  1BD9 548C  8F15 86EF  6770 052B  B8C1 FA69

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: