Re: dpkg enhancements
On Wed, 26 Nov 1997, Andreas Jellinghaus wrote:
> i propose two dpkg enhancements :
> alternative order in dpkg-buildpackage
> the normal order is :
> a) "debian/rules clean" : remove all old files
> b) "dpkg-source -b dir-version/" : build diff and dsc file
> c) "debian/rules build" : compile package
> d) "debian/rules binary" : install binaries, set permissions, build package
> i propose a flag to use the alternative order c) d) a) b)
> sometime i find a small but (such as a typo) in c) or d).
> it would be nice, to fix this typo and continue.
> somepackages take very long to compile, so you don't want to do this
> again, if your debian/rules file had a typo in the binary section.
> i will also report a copy of this as bug against dpkg-dev with priority
This has already been discussed some time ago. The problem with changing
the order is that you risk that the build process is not reproducable
since you are not assured that you compiled in a clean environment.
As we are currently not very good regarding reproducability (is this the
right term?) of our packages I strongly object that this.
(Just pick one random source package, try to compile it and check for
differences against the original .deb. Unfortunately, there is currently a
high probability that you'll get a different binary package.)
Note, that this does not apply when you do _private_ test compiles. You
could surely save a lot of time to skip step a) and b) (and probably c).
But for the final compile of which the results are uploaded, the order of
steps a) to d) may not be changed.
-- Christian Schwarz
Do you know firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,
Debian GNU/Linux? firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
Visit PGP-fp: 8F 61 EB 6D CF 23 CA D7 34 05 14 5C C8 DC 22 BA
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
Trouble? e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org .