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

Re: Standardisation of the name of the patching targets included in debian/rules.

On Wed, 2008-02-06 at 16:27 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 02:34:58PM +0000, Gerrit Pape wrote:
> > > So please go for patch/unpatch.
> > 
> > An unpatch target might be problematic.  There're packages with patches
> > that touch the upstream Makefile, and calling 'make unpatch' before
> > 'make clean' can break things; of course the clean target can depend on
> Then just make unpatch depends on clean.
> Anyhow, we were discussing naming here, that is the API for the package
> maintainer to implement, while you seem to dig into details on how the
> proposed target names should be internally implemented ...

"debian/rules clean" should remove patches so that dpkg-buildpackage
doesn't include the patches in the diff.gz twice.  (It might also have
to apply a patch to fix upstream's build system.  Well, so be it.)


Ben Hutchings
I'm not a reverse psychological virus.  Please don't copy me into your sig.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: