On Wed, 16 May 2007 10:52:02 +0200 (CEST) Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es> wrote: > On Wed, 16 May 2007, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > > > I mean, packages that fail to build the second time have for > > sure garbage left around after the former invocation of "clean". > > Not always. In some cases (for example, two of my packages) the error > was to modify a .po file "in place" to update it. I'm not sure what you mean - is this autotools where you simply symlink po/Makefile.in.in ? What modification are you making? Native or upstream package? > The second time > you build the package, dpkg-source complains about the .mo files, > as they are binary files and they have been modified. But .mo files don't need to be in the upstream source - they can be cleaned and regenerated with make -C po. > How do people deal with this, BTW? Maybe by configuring the package in > another directory and using the VPATH feature of make? I haven't come across this kind of error in any package (as well as my own, I'm currently cross-building Debian packages for Emdebian). -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
Attachment:
pgprnwrrceuEi.pgp
Description: PGP signature