Re: RFC: moving busybox into its own .deb
Erik Andersen wrote:
> I've been having a bit of difficulty managing busybox
> for the boot floppies.
> At the moment, I have my own busybox CVS source tree where I do primary
> development, and where I apply and test patches sent to me, and generally
> add/develop/break stuff. In addition, there is also the boot-floppies CVS
> source tree, to which contributions are added fairly regularly (which is a good
> thing, and makes both the boot-floppies and busybox better). However, this is
> also a real pain.
> When I make changes to my CVS tree, I have to manually merge the changes into
> the boot-floppies tree. When folks add changes to the boot-floppies tree, I
> have to manually merge those changes back into my local CVS tree. And in the
> process, of cource, things like $Id fields always get screwed up.
> I'd like to get some comments on my splitting busybox out from the
> boot-floppies tree, and instead being provided by a .deb (just like ash, the
> kernel, and several of the other tools). If I go ahead and split it out into a
> .deb, is this the type of change that would have to wait till after the potato
I have to objection you make a Debian package for your busybox provided the
fact that you build it based on the boot-floppies needs (i.e. configuration
file from boot-floppies tree).
IMO, you will have to add a "conflicts: sysvinit, fileutils" rule (maybe
others too) to ensure that your package will never be installed in a debian
system. That will break it I think.
This way, it will only be used in boot-floppies build process.
Eric Delaunay | S'il n'y a pas de solution, c'est qu'il n'y
firstname.lastname@example.org | a pas de problème. Devise Shadok.