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

Bug#482086: marked as done (lintian should not parse debian/rules but use debian/rules -nq <target> instead)

Your message dated Tue, 20 May 2008 20:15:51 +0200
with message-id <20080520181551.GB22689@artemis.madism.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#482086: lintian should not parse debian/rules but use debian/rules -nq <target> instead
has caused the Debian Bug report #482086,
regarding lintian should not parse debian/rules but use debian/rules -nq <target> instead
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
482086: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=482086
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: lintian
Version: 1.23.48
Severity: normal


  When using implicit rules, like %:, you won't see the target name
spelled out explicitly.

  The proper way to do is to use the -q gnu make feature to know for
sure if the target is here.

  debian/rules -nq <target-name> will return 0 or 1 if the target exists,
2 if not (0 means the target exists and is up 2 date, 1 that the target
exists and is _not_ up 2 date, and 2 that the target doesn't exist).

  Of course, this implies that debian/rules is  makefile, but AFAICT
it's always the case in Debian.

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 06:09:00PM +0000, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Pierre Habouzit <madcoder@debian.org> writes:
> > On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 05:51:54PM +0000, Russ Allbery wrote:
> 
> >> We tried to do this earlier and it broken horribly because when you use
> >> make -n, you can get false negatives, and if you don't use -n, well,
> >> obviously bad things happen.
> 
> >   Have you any idea of why -n could get errors ? I've built a system at
> > work that uses make -nspqr heavily and I've seen almost no issues so
> > far, so I'm a bit surprised.
> 
> I think the problem was specifically with invocations of submakes, which
> is how some packages end up implementing these rules.  There's a bug
> somewhere, but I can't find it at the moment.  :/

  Hmm I see.

> >   See planet.debian.org today :)
>
> debhelper v7 is already fixed in Subversion, which I assume is what you
> were referring to.  Have you run into anything else?

  I had in the past, but fixed it another way in the end. Well, let's
forget about it.

-- 
·O·  Pierre Habouzit
··O                                                madcoder@debian.org
OOO                                                http://www.madism.org

Attachment: pgpWVfXUL6AnT.pgp
Description: PGP signature


--- End Message ---
Reply to: