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

Re: Proposal: dh_install - a new debhelper

Norbert Nemec wrote:

> Again, the situation is: I have to copy a huge bunch of files out of
> one tree into another tree. In some situations, I have to copy single
> files into distinct directories, in some I have to rename files, then
> there are subtrees that go completly to one other place in the new
> tree.  [etc.]

I agree that it seems a bit inelegant to have all this done "by hand" in
debian/rules.  Were I in your shoes, I'd probably patch the upstream
Makefile instead.  A pretty fair majority of upstream packages *do* have
install rules in their Makefile that actually work, so creating a new
debhelper command for the rare cases where they don't seems a bit

I might even file a wishlist bug against my own package in such a case,
complaining about the badly designed upstream Makefile, and then forward
that to the upstream maintainers.  Of course, we all know that some
upstream maintainers are not very responsive, which is why I'd go ahead
and hack the upstream Makefile for myself.
Chris Waters   xtifr@dsp.net | I have a truly elegant proof of the
      or    xtifr@debian.org | above, but it is too long to fit into
http://www.dsp.net/xtifr     | this .signature file.

Reply to: