martin f krafft <madduck@debian.org> writes:
> also sprach Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt <marc@marcbrockschmidt.de> [2004.10.26.1738 +0200]:
>> optional-python-package:
>> foo
>> bar
>> dh_python
>
> Uh, what's this? If it's in debian/rules, it should have
> corresponding entries in debian/control, no?
No, note the optional. Just think of some software with an optional
python extension. You can build it with some special make flags, but
the normal package doesn't include. As the maintainer is a good guy, he
provides the needed makefile stuff in debian/rules and says to his
users: If you need the python extension, add optional-python-package to
the binary-indep dependencies.
Yes, that sounds like it doesn't happen, but i've actually seen
(unofficial) packages doing something like that.
>> You should also think of the cdbs-based packages using
>> python-distutils.mk.
> True. Well, still doable...
Yes? Do it, please.
Marc
--
$_=')(hBCdzVnS})3..0}_$;//::niam/s~=)]3[))_$(rellac(=_$({pam(esrever })e$.)4/3*
)e$(htgnel+23(rhc,"u"(kcapnu ,""nioj ;|_- |/+9-0z-aZ-A|rt~=e$;_$=e${pam tnirp{y
V2ajFGabus} yV2ajFGa&{gwmclBHIbus}gwmclBHI&{yVGa09mbbus}yVGa09mb&{hBCdzVnSbus';
s/\n//g;s/bus/\nbus/g;eval scalar reverse # <mailto:marc@marcbrockschmidt.de>
Attachment:
pgpbg8GCVsF44.pgp
Description: PGP signature