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

Re: Possible framework for `debmake replacement'

andy.mortimer@poboxes.com (Andy Mortimer)  wrote on 21.02.97 in <Pine.LNX.3.95q.970221181325.15777P-100000@asm21.emma.cam.ac.uk>:

> On 21 Feb 1997, Manoj Srivastava wrote:

> > 	I don't see the need. I want to make the helpers update  the
> >  template, but only when invoked by the user *to update the template*,
> >  not while making a new version of the package.
> No! The template is provided for the maintainer, for her own use. Nothing
> should change it afterwards; this is the whole point of a template. If we
> want to dynamically modify debian/rules, then call it a compiler, or a
> constructor, or something. Then the helpers can be changed when necessary
> (not that I would imagine they would be very often) to correct mistakes,
> or to (say) compress manpages; the maintainer doesn't need to do
> anything.

Something like this might work:

Have a special --update mode to the tool. Have it do rudimentary detection  
of user stuff.

Have it *not* write a new rules file, but instead have it write a  
rules.new file, and have it also write a rules.diff file by automatically  
invoking diff -u or maybe even diff -ubBiw or something like that (that  
is, whitespace differences are usually not interesting).

This enables the maintainer to easily check what that update does, and  
decide what he wants to keep, and what he wants to junk.

> And if you're worried about them not realising their package is going to
> break, well, they should be reading the changes files if they're
> installing the new versions. ;)

They first need to be aware that the version has changed. Imagine a multi- 
developer machine.

MfG Kai

TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org . Trouble? e-mail to Bruce@Pixar.com

Reply to: