also sprach Jean Parpaillon <artefact@altern.org> [2006.06.12.0931 +0200]:
> Uhhh,
> I did not want to launch such a big discussion :-)
Then you should not have written to debian-devel. :)
> - I first used a simple "rules" script, because I can not imagine
> using a wrapper while not knowing the system it is around.
> - But now, I use CDBS because it is much simpler to follow the
> policies with it, and to have "good practices", ie using
> *.install, *.dirs, etc. files.
Those files are debhelper files; you don't need to use CDBS to use
them.
> To conclude, I will use CDBS because :
> - I know how to write a package without it
> - and there are no hacks in the packaging.
Fine. Your choice. Hopefully I never have to step in to help out
with your package.
also sprach Tollef Fog Heen <tfheen@err.no> [2006.06.12.1051 +0200]:
> > Is Debhelper our C and CDBS our C++?
>
> CDBS is to debhelper as XSLT (or prolog) is to C (or another procedural
> language).
Riiiight.
also sprach Christoph Berg <myon@debian.org> [2006.06.12.1138 +0200]:
> Not in that length. The template question used by most AMs is:
>
> Write a small shell script which does the following two things:
> a. prints whether a Debian package archive file has a copyright file
> in the appropriate location.
> b. prints out the package version from the control file which is
> inside the .deb.
> You may use tar, ar, grep, etc., but not any middle or high-level
> dpkg tools.
Neither of these tests show whether the candidate can build a source
package without helpers.
--
Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list!
.''`. martin f. krafft <madduck@debian.org>
: :' : proud Debian developer and author: http://debiansystem.info
`. `'`
`- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system
"the 'volatile' keyword
is implemented syntactically
but not semantically"
-- documentation of m$ visual c, around 1992
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature (GPG/PGP)