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

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

>>>>> "Guy" == Guy Maor <maor@ece.utexas.edu> writes:

Guy> Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@datasync.com> writes:
>> 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?

Guy> I think he's referring to the perl dpkg-dev scripts -
Guy> #!/usr/bin/perl.

Not really, because the dpkg/scripts makefile actually looks for perl
and is substituting the proper path upon installation.

It is only really a problem with `rules', if any script (including
`rules' itself) would think of executing it directly, and if the
maintainer includes a perl script of his own device somewhere, that he
wants to run during building.

It is not a big problem. After all, porting something to a non-debian
environment would most likely need some patching, but perhaps there
should someday be a small chapter on debianizing software in a truly
portable way somewhere in the package maintainer documentation.

I must also say that I do not myself have many experiences in porting
stuff from debian to Solaris/IRIX platforms, so it is not clear how
much of a problem we are looking at.

Christian Lynbech          | Computer Science Department, University of Aarhus
Office: R0.32              | Ny Munkegade, Building 540, DK-8000 Aarhus C
Phone: +45 8942 3218       | lynbech@daimi.aau.dk -- www.daimi.aau.dk/~lynbech
Hit the philistines three times over the head with the Elisp reference manual.
                                        - petonic@hal.com (Michael A. Petonic)

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 .

Reply to: