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

Re: Another take on package relationship substvars



On Thu, 22 Feb 2024 19:32:21 +0100, Niels Thykier wrote:

> I think our package helper tooling should just automatically aggregate all
> provided substvars of the format ${*:Depends} and append it the Depends
> field. Rinse and repeat for other relationship fields.

I very much like this proposal.

And:
 
> If you forget to add a susbtvars that you should added, it is a latent RC
> bug with only a warning from dpkg-gencontrol that you might miss if you grab
> a coffee while waiting for the build to complete.  If you add one that is
> not provided, you get a warning from dpkg-gencontrol that will nag you when
> you *don't* go for coffee while waiting for the build.

I can relate a lot to this paragraph and would append: With or
without the coffee, each time I see a warning from dpkg-gencontrol I
have to think for some time about which of the two possible problems
is meant (substvar defined in d/control but not generated, or
substvar generated but missing in d/control), and that is really
annoying.
 
Cheers,
gregor

-- 
 .''`.  https://info.comodo.priv.at -- Debian Developer https://www.debian.org
 : :' : OpenPGP fingerprint D1E1 316E 93A7 60A8 104D  85FA BB3A 6801 8649 AA06
 `. `'  Member VIBE!AT & SPI Inc. -- Supporter Free Software Foundation Europe
   `-   

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital Signature


Reply to: