Re: Increasing regularity of build systems
On Wed, Sep 15, 1999 at 01:08:22PM -0500, David Welton wrote:
> I think that as many packages as reasonably possible should migrate
> towards them. They work pretty well, but I don't believe in forcing
> them on people if they are really opposed.
So even if we did decide to do what you suggest, I am free to hand-roll
my rules files like I've done since I joined[1]?
[1] with one exception, which did not last long:-)
> Do you seem what I mean?
I see broken debian/rules files that should be fixed. I see no reasons
for mandating debhelper (although I agree that using one of the helper
tools may make it easier for the maintainer to fix these). I probably
have such rules files myself, but I correct them - in my own way that
does not involve any helper packages - if I notice them (for example,
if you report a bug about it).
> I'm not just talking about debhelper, but about rules files in
> general. I think using debhelper is one part of this.
I am with you in demanding well-written debian/rules files. I am not
with you in saying that debhelper is the way to fix these - it's *a*
way, sure, but not the only one, and you must be careful in not blaming
people for not using debhelper.
> Policy is not the be all and end all of Debian - frankly, it doesn't
> interest me much.
How so? You are here proposing Debian policy, you're just doing it
on -devel.
> It's a general problem that manifests itself in
> different ways that are difficult to discuss on a general level.
Then give us specific examples. You did this in this message, which
is good.
> And
> yet, it's good to at least talk about it at this level so as to try
> and come up with a set of good guidelines to go by before going out
> and doing a package by package combing of Debian.
It is hard to discuss a problem which is not clearly defined (either by
general definition or by specific examples)
--
%%% Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho % gaia@iki.fi % http://www.iki.fi/gaia/ %%%
""
(John Cage)
Reply to: