Re: Bug#629385: Request for TC to rule on a course of action for supporting build-arch

[Andreas Barth <aba@not.so.argh.org>]

* Steve Langasek (vorlon@debian.org) [110612 01:09]:
> On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 09:41:18AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > ---
> > Turn on direct use of "debian/rules build-arch" unless the package seems
> > to be missing the target according to "make -qn". In that case output a
> > warning that asks the packager to implement the required targets, but
> > fallback to using the "build" target.
> 
> > The fallback to build and the "make -qn" auto-detection is temporary to
> > ease the transition but should dropped at some point (wheezy+1, or
> > wheezy+2). The policy should document that the targets must be supported.
> > ---
> 
> This actually reads to me the same as option 1.  What distinction are you
> meaning to draw here?  It's not very "direct" use of build-arch if we're
> checking 'make -qn' first. 

Agreed. It should better read as:
-->--
Normally, the availability of the target "build-arch" is checked by
"make -qn". However, packages might explicitly override that with
using (whatever header); in case this variable exists, it boolean
value is used instead of running "make -qn".
--<--

I think we could afford that even in the long run - if it works for
95% of the packages or so "out of the box", another header for a few
doesn't really hurt.



Andi