Re: Portable dpkg - paths of utilities (perl and make)

[Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@datasync.com>]

Hi,
>>"Christian" == Christian Lynbech <lynbech@daimi.aau.dk> writes:

Christian> Requiring the target platform to provide perl5 and make
Christian> under /usr/bin will not be perceived friendly by many
Christian> system-administrators who are used to being able to confine
Christian> local installations under /usr/local, leaving /usr to the
Christian> whims of the vendor.

	I thought the policy manual says (about maintainer scripts,
 and scripts in general) not to use full path names, but to
 assume that the common programs will be available in the PATH. Maybe
 we should extend this to the rules file?

Christian> I do not know if there really is any problem, but perhaps
Christian> there should some comments in the policy manual on the
Christian> subject, for instance asking that one does not rely on the
Christian> executability of debian/rules, but rather use something
Christian> like `make -f rules <target>', if the (source) package is
Christian> supposed to be portable.

	Also, maybe one should ensure that dpkg-buildpackage does the
same. 

	manoj
-- 
 There's nothing wrong with using four-letter words in explaining the
 facts of life to children--words like love, kiss, help, care, give,
 ... Sam Levenson
Manoj Srivastava               <url:mailto:srivasta@acm.org>
Mobile, Alabama USA            <url:http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .