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

Re: RFC: Standardizing source package artifacts build paths

Hello Niels,

On Tue 14 Apr 2020 at 10:54AM +02, Niels Thykier wrote:

> Guillem and I have debated this and come to a solution, which we believe
> will be able to address the concerns about the path being "hidden". It
> also enables us to simplify parts of the migration in some cases.
> The short version of that solution is to enable debhelper to expose the
> relevant directories where you want it and under debian/.build at the
> same time (the latter being a symlink to the former)[1].
>   This can be made to cover the directories you mention above, but also
> e.g. the build directory for upstream builds, which was mentioned
> elsewhere in this thread.
> Based on the feedback so far, I will go with the following defaults in
> debhelper:
>  * build directories are exposed if -B/--builddirectory is used to
>    request it.  If there is no explicit -B/--builddirectory, it will
>    (in a new compat level) be hidden by default.

So, if you want the build directories to be exposed, you have to pass
--builddirectory to debhelper, so it becomes a choice made by the
maintainer of each package?

I'm concerned that this doesn't help address the issue of new
contributors struggling to find .build when trying to figure out where
their build artifacts have gone -- it's not going to be any easier for
them to find the --builddirectory option.

As has been said, a non-hidden 'build' is easier to notice if you're
looking around.

Sean Whitton

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: