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

Re: Which targets are mandatory in debian/rules?



On 7 Feb 1999, James Troup wrote:

> Mitch Blevins <mblevin@debian.org> writes:
> 
> > James Troup wrote:
> > > Mitch Blevins <mblevin@debian.org> writes:
> > > 
> > > > The $64K question is... is this okay?
> > > 
> > > No; see the fine packaging manual.  `build' is a required target for
> > > debian/rules (3.2.1) and if you omit, your package will be unbuildable
> > > with dpkg-buildpackage and as result will fail for all the non-i386
> > > ports and anyone who tries to build the package from source.
> > 
> > Thanks for the pointer.  I will put in an empty build target to satisfy
> > this.
> 
> No, the build target should be present and should do something,
> i.e. build the package.  Even if it only depends on the two other
> build targets, it should still build stuff.

In fact, in this case, I'd suggest:

build: build-a build-b

build-a: configure-a
	$(MAKE) DESTDIR=debian/tmp-a

build-b: configure-b
	$(MAKE) DESTDIR=debian/tmp-b

configure-a: stamp-configure-a

configure-b: stamp-configure-b

stamp-configure-a:
	rm stamp-configure-*
	./configure --options-for-a
	touch stamp-configure-a

stamp-configure-b:
	rm stamp-configure-*
	./configure --options-for-b
	touch stamp-configure-b

binary: binary-a binary-b

binary-a:
	(test root)
	(build deb from tmp-a)

binary-b:
	(test root)
	(build deb from tmp-b)

or some similar scheme.

I imagine debhelper automates some of this :)


/----------------+-------------------------------+---------------------\
|  Jelibean aka  | jules@jellybean.co.uk         |  6 Evelyn Rd	       |
|  Jules aka     | jules@debian.org              |  Richmond, Surrey   |
|  Julian Bean   | jmlb2@hermes.cam.ac.uk        |  TW9 2TF *UK*       |
+----------------+-------------------------------+---------------------+
|  War doesn't demonstrate who's right... just who's left.             |
|  When privacy is outlawed... only the outlaws have privacy.          |
\----------------------------------------------------------------------/


Reply to: