Re: Getting dh_install to do what we need
On Thu, Dec 08, 2011 at 08:14:52AM +0100, Gergely Nagy wrote:
> I disagree. Look at dpatch. It had executable patches since the
> beginning, and a standardised script from 2.0 onwards.
One problem with executable patches was the fact you couldn't reason
about the packaging without first executing them, in the general case,
which was frowned upon by security-concious people who like automated
package testing tools.
Does that not apply here?