Re: Package modifying its own control at build?
On Fri, Mar 09, 2001 at 11:53:39AM +0100, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 08, 2001 at 10:43:36PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 08, 2001 at 10:10:25PM -0500, Camm Maguire wrote:
> > > Greetings! Can a package be structured to build a variable number of
> > > subarchitecture-specific binary packages depending on the architecture
> > > running the compilation? Perhaps control.i386, control.alpha, etc?
> >
> > You should only have one control file, and use the Architecture field.
> > Generating the control file it build time is considered bad, because
> > then the .dsc does not contain all the binary package names that it
> > builds, and this can do bad things in the archive.
>
> Well, in this case this is correct. However, as a general rule, generating
> the control file will become important for a lot of packages with the
> increase of versioned dependencies on linux specific or virtual packages and
> the Hurd port. The purpose is then not to build different packages, but to
> have different dependency information in the package for Linux and for Hurd.
>
> For example, libstdc++2.10-dev depends on libc6-dev (>= 2.1.95).
> The Hurd libc0.2-dev provides libc6-dev, but that is not enough to fulfill
> the dependency. The control file will have to be modified for the Hurd.
That's what the options to dpkg-gencontrol are for. Check the glibc
build, and how it does it.
--
-----------=======-=-======-=========-----------=====------------=-=------
/ Ben Collins -- ...on that fantastic voyage... -- Debian GNU/Linux \
` bcollins@debian.org -- bcollins@openldap.org -- bcollins@linux.com '
`---=========------=======-------------=-=-----=-===-======-------=--=---'
Reply to: