On Wed, Jun 30, 2004 at 10:44:37AM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: > || On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 13:19:26 +0200 (CEST) > || Andreas Tille <tillea@rki.de> wrote: > > at> On Wed, 30 Jun 2004, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote: > >> Policy says the Binary: header should list all packages that _could_ be > >> build (but not necessarily are, for example, the xfree86 source package > >> lists xserver-xfree86, but it isn't build on s390). So, you should make > >> the clean target to put in debian/control the union of packages that > >> are build across all archs with this meta-package, and then all is fine. > at> The problem is that the cdd-dev framework provides a common template for > at> a control file which might lead to completely different binary target > at> packages (for instance: med-bio, med-imaging, med-tools, ... for Debian-Med > at> but jr-toys, jr-art, ... etc for Debian-Junior). So it is either impossible > at> to insert the Binaries in advance or we have to find a completely different > at> way to build these meta packages which would reduce the flexibility we > at> wanted to gain. > > Is not possible build the control file in configure target, before the build? That won't help, since a source package should on rebuild not be functionally different, I don't see why it isn't possible to do stuff in the clean target that can already be done later on. I didn't yet look at cdd-dev though... maybe I should. Prod me about it some other day, and I will. --Jeroen -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar Jeroen@wolffelaar.nl (also for Jabber & MSN; ICQ: 33944357) http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl
Attachment:
pgpe1vNGiEVs1.pgp
Description: PGP signature