Re: sbuild package
On Wednesday 04 August 2004 00:35, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
> Well, basically it's what I did with that crap. Maintaining in two
> different places (sbuild and debootstrap) the list of base and
> build-essential packages is at least stupid.
> Michael Banck proposed to startup an alioth project for sbuild
> maintainership. I'd prefer to enlarge the maintainership
> to the whole buildd chain (aka wanna-build) which should become
> surely a standard package, not a woodoo macumba as it is currently.
Right, the wanna-build src package from cvs.linux-m68k.org must be
group-maintained at alioth. It still has no Build-Depends line in its control
file and still strictly build-depends by old packages like python1.5 from
stable. Also the sbuild deb produced by this src package contains the tool of
'andrea' whereas the sbuild 0.30 from unstable doesn't contain the andrea
tool. I think that if we want two sbuild packages for some reason (which
reminds me about dinstall and mini-dinstall), then the sbuild 0.30 package
from unstable must be renamed as mini-sbuild or sbuild-lite or similar,
otherwise the sbuild 0.30 in the unstable archive must be replaced by sbuild
from wanna-build src package (I'm not sure why it can not be a drop-in
replacement :-/). That wanna-build src package must produces the following
debs: wanna-build, buildd, sbuild, andrea (currently bundled within the
sbuild deb), quinn-diff, rbuild, and wanna-build-doc (upstreamed by
http://m68k.debian.org/buildd/abstract/node2.html). It would be nice if this
wanna-build thingie uses extensively debconf to ask for configurations. Hm,
where to find sources and docs for the dinstall (not mini-dinstall) program?
All these are after Sarge works of cource.
pub 4096R/0E4BD0AB 2003-03-18 <keyserver.bu.edu ; pgp.mit.edu>
fingerprint 1AE7 7C66 0A26 5BFF DF22 5D55 1C57 0C89 0E4B D0AB