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

Re: First emdebian package



On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 12:53:28 +0100
"Martin Fuzzey" <mfuzzey@gmail.com> wrote:

> Ok I've done the first one (strace) :
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=512103

Excellent, thanks.

I'll add strace to the repository in the next few days and then the
autobuilder will keep it up to date.
 
> The package builds cleanly (with both emdebuild and empdebuild) and
> executes correctly on the target.
> The contents look ok (just the binary, no man pages etc).
> 
> However I do have a few questions :
> 
> The build worked fine even _without_ the patch for debian/xcontrol
> (including in a embdebuild chroot). So do I need the xcontrol in this
> case? (there are no library dependencies beyond build-essential and
> debhelper).

Ah, yes, in that case, xcontrol is currently optional.

> Assuming the xcontrol is needed there is a lot of duplication with
> control. The wiki mentions the possibility of using xcontrol(1) from
> debian/rules to generate debian/control from debian/xcontrol however a
> cursory look at a few crush packages didn't show me any uses of this
> (I haven't grepped for this on a full checkout though). What is the
> recommended practice here?

Use xcontrol by default but packages can omit it if there are no
cross-dependencies needed at this time. In time (once Simon does more
work on debian-x-control), xcontrol will become mandatory for
cross-building as it will also embed metadata concerning changes within
the package (e.g. gnupg uses --enable-minimal which has appreciable
effects of functionality. See also #480710.)

> Is there anyway of getting emdebuild not to generate patches for my
> editor autosave files (*~) ?

Hmm, I can look at that. It probably should omit all files that look
like backups or autosave cruft.

A wishlist bug against emdebian-tools could be handy - in case I
forget - "emdebuild should ignore all backup and autosave files" with
examples of the suffixes used by your editor(s).

-- 


Neil Williams
=============
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
http://e-mail.is-not-s.ms/

Attachment: pgpqLSnE8UW93.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: