Re: Build systems (was Re: An alarming trend (no it's not flaimbait.))
Adam Heath writes:
> On 27 Dec 2001, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
>
> > * Adam Heath
> >
> > | dbs(doogie build system, debian build system)
> > |
> > | See autofs, apache, x(contains a pre-alpha version of dbs).
> > |
> > | Do NOT see glibc, gcc. Those use dpatch, which was around before dbs. Dbs
> > | has a larger following(but well under 100 packages use it).
> >
> > What are the differences between DBS and dpatch, and why should I
> > choose one or the other?
>
> dpatch offers no patch ordering. dbs does
it does have patch ordering. the order is determined by the
debian_patches macro.
> Also, an unreleased dbs supports patch dependencies. It was a quick simple
> modification to dbs to get it to support this. Dbs uses a single script to
> apply all patches, which makes adding features easy. dpatch turns each patch
> into a script, which means the scriptage needs to be updated by hand when a
> new feature is needed.
yes, the rationale is to run commands after the patch was applied
(mostly autoconf to regenerate configure)
> Neither dbs nor dpatch are documented.
found this out while looking at dbs...
Reply to: