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

Bug#430889: developers-reference: Please don't suggest vim as an example to follow

On Wed, Jun 27, 2007 at 09:06:37PM -0400, Daniel Schepler wrote:
> In section 6.1.3 of the version of developers-reference on www.debian.org, 
> it's suggested to follow the example of vim for a package requiring multiple 
> builds.  I have to disagree with this suggestion: vim's debian/rules build 
> target just builds in the same place multiple times and cleans in between, 
> copying out the binaries when a build is done.  But there's a reason why in 
> most packages we don't have debian/rules build remove all the intermediate .o 
> and other files.
> The sane way to handle this is to create multiple build directories to keep 
> the intermediate files from each build.

This is how the current Vim packaging behaves.  It makes use of
upstream's "shadow directory" to perform builds with different configs
in separate sub-directories.  There have been various improvements to
the build system in the past few months.  This cleanup of building the
variant packages and actually being able to do separate arch/all builds
are the two most notable.

On the other hand, Vim's rules file is still a semi-complex one.  If you
still think another package would be better to use as an example for
building multiple binary packages, I have no objections.  I just figured
I should clear up the current state of the debian/rules file.

GPG Key: 1024D/61326D40 2003-09-02 James Vega <jamessan@debian.org>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: