Re: Do we want to Require or Recommend DH
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 05:58:47PM +0200, Thomas Goirand wrote:
Why would one want to switch that one to something else? The package,
basically, consists of a shell script and a man page only. The
minimalism of this package doesn't require an over-engineered dh
sequencer, does it?
I maintain one of the simplest possible packages (in non-free),
doom-wad-shareware, that is even simpler: it consists of three files total:
/usr/share/doc/doom-wad-shareware/changelog.Debian.gz
/usr/share/doc/doom-wad-shareware/copyright
/usr/share/games/doom/doom1.wad
For the source package, I thought "why do I need debhelper for such a simple
package". And so I did things by hand instead¹, and I still screwed something
up².
This is clearly a stupid case of premature optimisation, yak shaving, etc.; I
suspect many other instances of "why bother for such a simple package" in the
archive have elements of these too.
(An unrelated, but amusing mess-up in this trivial package: for the first 11
years, there was a version mismatch between what was actually in the .deb and
what the version claimed)
1. https://sources.debian.org/src/doom-wad-shareware/1.9.fixed-2/debian/rules/
2. https://tracker.debian.org/news/449441/accepted-doom-wad-shareware-19fixed-2-source-all/
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Jonathan Dowland
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://jmtd.net
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ Please do not CC me, I am subscribed to the list.
Reply to: