Bug#1031679: lintian: d/rules: should suggest using `execute_before/_after_dh_command` instead of `override_dh_command`

To: Gioele Barabucci <gioele@svario.it>, 1031679@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Bug#1031679: lintian: d/rules: should suggest using `execute_before/_after_dh_command` instead of `override_dh_command`
From: Christoph Berg <myon@debian.org>
Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2023 15:48:00 +0100
Message-id: <Y/OIIGjJTGetrLuk@msg.df7cb.de>
Reply-to: Christoph Berg <myon@debian.org>, 1031679@bugs.debian.org
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 9e1ac070-9504-13cd-409e-d2922b2c5584@svario.it>
References: <[🔎] 9e1ac070-9504-13cd-409e-d2922b2c5584@svario.it> <[🔎] 9e1ac070-9504-13cd-409e-d2922b2c5584@svario.it>

Re: Gioele Barabucci
>     execute_after_dh_clean:
>         touch this_strange_file

The downside of this is that it makes backporting to buster-and-older
harder since it doesn't have the required debhelper version yet.

Christoph

Reply to:

Follow-Ups:
- Bug#1031679: lintian: d/rules: should suggest using `execute_before/_after_dh_command` instead of `override_dh_command`
  - From: Jelmer Vernooij <jelmer@debian.org>

References:
- Bug#1031679: lintian: d/rules: should suggest using `execute_before/_after_dh_command` instead of `override_dh_command`
  - From: Gioele Barabucci <gioele@svario.it>

Prev by Date: Bug#1031679: lintian: d/rules: should suggest using `execute_before/_after_dh_command` instead of `override_dh_command`
Next by Date: Bug#1031679: lintian: d/rules: should suggest using `execute_before/_after_dh_command` instead of `override_dh_command`
Previous by thread: Bug#1031679: lintian: d/rules: should suggest using `execute_before/_after_dh_command` instead of `override_dh_command`
Next by thread: Bug#1031679: lintian: d/rules: should suggest using `execute_before/_after_dh_command` instead of `override_dh_command`
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread