Hi, On Saturday 22 September 2007 20:23, Andreas Tille wrote: > On Sat, 22 Sep 2007, Holger Levsen wrote: > > replaced? or changed? Andreas, do you have an example how they would look > > like? > > Yes. Try > > apt-get source debian-med > > You can use identical Makefile and debian/rules for debian-edu. Just > try and report any problem. On a first look I screamed "cdbs", on a second look I see a normal rules file using debhelper... I'm not convinced yet, but I acknowledge I need to take a closer look. (Only looked 2min. so far...) > > Right. Though I wonder if this shouldnt be done in a branch, so that we > > can still release r2 with the etch-based version. > Well, cdd-dev < 0.4 in Etch might be a problem. So you would first need to upload cdd-dev to our etch and we would need to approve it. I guess I definitly prefer to keep a branch. Probably for etch, so that the development in trunk can go on with more ease. But personally I think we should keep the build-system for etch the way it is, and use cdd-dev (if at all, see above (*)) for lenny. (*) "see above" because I'm not sure yet, how cdbs-like cdd-dev is. If it's like or similar to cdbs, I _strongly_ object. (And as said, I acknowledge that I might be completly wrong here. Please prove me wrong.) regards, Holger
Attachment:
pgp7gKt8vlwFv.pgp
Description: PGP signature