Re: dpkg enhancements
Christian Schwarz <email@example.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 26 Nov 1997, Andreas Jellinghaus wrote:
>> 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)
>As we are currently not very good regarding reproducability (is this the
>right term?) of our packages I strongly object that this.
>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.
I'd like a flag such as Andreas describes added to dpkg-buildpackage,
because I usually use dpkg-buildpackage for test builds, not just the
final 'upload' compile. (I suppose "debian/rules build" is just too
much to type compared with "dpkg-b<tab>"...)
How about adding this flag, but have dpkg-buildpackage refuse to pgp-sign
any files when it's used, as a warning to the maintainer that the package
produced should not be uploaded?
White pages entry, with PGP key: <URL:http://alethea.ukc.ac.uk/wp?95cpb4>
PGP public keyprint: 74 68 AB 2E 1C 60 22 94 B8 21 2D 01 DE 66 13 E2
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
Trouble? e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org .