Re: Environment variables, debian/rules and dpkg-buildpackage

[Loïc Minier <lool@dooz.org>]

On Sun, May 10, 2009, Steve Langasek wrote:
> I'm really surprised to see this approach getting traction.  To me, this
> seems like a significant, unprecedented departure from the kinds of
> interfaces we've mandated in Policy in the past (i.e., environment
> variables, executables and command-line options).  While one build helper or
> another may mandate Makefile includes, there's never been anything of the
> sort in Policy, and I don't think it's good to add such a thing now.  I
> thought it was generally recognized that it's a Bad Idea to implement config
> files using your interpreter's 'include' functionality, but that's basically
> what we have here.
> 
> If there's any intention at all that Policy eventually mandate use of these
> Makefile includes, then at a minimum I think Policy needs to *very* tightly
> constrain what dpkg is allowed to put in those files, to avoid future
> incompatibilities.  But unfortunately, if we're going to support site files,
> we're in no position to enforce such requirements there; so packages are
> still subject to breakage from admins populating their site file with random
> settings (or syntax errors?).

 Full ack, thanks for putting it so clearly

-- 
Loïc Minier