Re: Ok to use upstream doumentation as-is (i.e. not regenerate)?
On 05/06/2011 07:39, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Jun 2011 21:54:11 +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>
>> What I do is use upstream provided tarballs, then put aside
>> autotools-generated files, then autogenerate myself, and in the clean
>> rule put back the upstream-provided files (because I want not only
>> minimal required build routines idempotent but also building with
>> git-buildpackage).
>
> In the clean rules, you can just delete those autogenerated files.
If you do not want git-buildpackage to complain (of
"not committed changes"), you need to restore them.
I often use this in my rules:
clean:
[...]
# if this is a git repository, restore removed files that would have
# been ignored by dpkg-source
-test -d .git && git checkout -- $$(git status | \
sed -e '/^#[[:space:]]*deleted:[[:space:]]*/s/^#[[:space:]]*deleted:[[:space:]]*//p;d' | \
grep -v '^debian/')
>
--
Vincent Danjean GPG key ID 0x9D025E87 vdanjean@debian.org
GPG key fingerprint: FC95 08A6 854D DB48 4B9A 8A94 0BF7 7867 9D02 5E87
Unofficial packages: http://moais.imag.fr/membres/vincent.danjean/deb.html
APT repo: deb http://people.debian.org/~vdanjean/debian unstable main
Reply to: