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

Re: debstd trouble with multi-binary package



On Sun, Jul 05, 1998 at 03:25:40PM +0200, Martin Bialasinski wrote:
> JC> /usr/doc/debhelper/from-debstd
> 
> JC> It raised another though:  The result of following these instructions 
> showed
> JC> me a LOT of things to add to debian/rules.  Most of them aren't used
> in this
> JC> package.  How do I know which are and which aren't for sure?
> 
> I did the move and all problems I had with debstd vanished. All dh_*
> utilities have manpages. When you don't add cronjobs, then simply don't
> use dh_installcron (although it won't do any harm when it doesn't find the
> files to install). The examples in the debhelper packages also helped me a
> lot.

Yes, it's becoming clear quickly that I was very wise to get rid of the
debmake stuff as soon as I fixed debian/rules to actually build an
installable package properly without hand editing.


> Here is a part  of my rules file before and after the move:
>  (it is simplyfied, as this is a multibinary package. But hey, I just have 
>   to add -a after all dh_* calls and it wil build all packages instead of
>  only the main one :-) 

[..]

> Note that you can use dh_testdir [$(checkdir)] and dh_testroot [checkroot]
> in the whole rules file. 

Thanks, I did and it's much nicer looking now.  And shorter.


> dh_fixperms is the chown, chmod part

Good, those lines can go away then.


> I moved form the debstd invovation README README.source TODO into the docs
> file and call dh_installdocs instead
> Really nice is dh_installchangelogs instead of the install -m644 ... call
> dpkg-gencontrol is now dh_gencontrol

That and a quick bit of confusion (solved) over what dh_strip does, and I
think I'm ready to try it again..  <begins buildpackage>  Hey, it worked. 
Wow, I didn't expect that.  =>


> Hope this helps,
> 	Martin (see you on #debian; I am surf)

It did lots, thanks.  And I've talked to you briefly..

Attachment: pgp2TaR3pdssH.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: