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

Re: Do you use the DBS? Document it!

>> Adam Heath <doogie@debian.org> writes:

 > I'd suggest README.building, myself.

 Sounds good, too.

 > Note, that there is another source patch system out there, in use by
 > at least glibc and gcc, that existed before dbs did.  I have no
 > connection with that system(which is commonly known as dpatch).

 That's precisely the problem.  Everyone is implementing more or less
 the same idea with inconsistent UIs.  I don't care if the UIs are not
 the same.  I just want to unpack the source without having to wander
 thru debian/rules files.  What I'm saying is basically:

    # Unpack and patch sources
            whatever your patch system uses to unpack and patch

 I really don't mind the inconsistent locations for the unpacked and
 patched sources.  Those are usually easy to guess after a simple ls.

 > As for DBS packages, the only official way to get at the source is
 > thru sys-build.mk.
 which is good.  The problem is that you have to first figure out
 that/if the package is using the official DBS.  That's the reason why
 I'm asking for an standarized method to unpack and patch.  Since we are
 all used to 'debian/rules action', using 'unpack' as the action sounds
 reasonable to me.
 > source.make: $(STAMP_DIR)/source.make

 which is also fine.  As long as there's eventually a single one for
 every system.


To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to: