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

Re: dpkg-source: unrepresentable changes to source



On Mon, Nov 12, 2001 at 01:47:04PM +0100, Florian Hinzmann wrote:

> On 04-Nov-2001 Steve M. Robbins wrote:

> > the old version is "nonexistent".  Normally one would expect the
> > source distribution to include these files (INSTALL, install-sh, etc).
> 
> No, I am packaging from the official release tar file. These needed
> files are not included in upstream source. 
> Upstream provides an autogen.sh script. The user is supposed
> to run that script and a normal "make;make install" works
> after that.

I think you should educate the upstream author(s).  
Introduce them to "make dist".


> > However, after a number of bug reports, I have changed my mind.  It
> > doesn't pay to mess around with automake/autoconf/libtool and stuff
> > inside debian/rules.  All I do now is: make any tweaks to Makefile.am
> > or configure.in, re-run the auto-stuff on my local copy, and live with
> > the enlarged diff that results.  
> 
> I do not need to change anything until now. But I need to run these
> tools. You say you "re-run the auto-stuff on your local copy". As I understand
> you here you run it manually and then you build the diff after that. 
> I want to reach the same goal, but don't want to do it manually.
> Therefore I do "mess around with automake/.. inside debian/rules" and call the
> apropriate scripts there. This should lead to the same results, right?

Not quite.  

You might get the same .deb, but you'll also get more bug reports if
you try to do it inside debian/rules.


> >                                  If you need to run-something like
> > autogen.sh that has "automake --add-missing --force", just replace the
> > resulting symlinks by the corresponding file.  Again, you need only do
> > this once.
> 
> What do you mean by saying I only need to do this once? I do 
> replace this files everytime the symlinks get created. That is,
> everytime I build a new Debian package including the diff. 
> I feel I am missing your point here absolutely.  ;)

What I wrote only makes sense in the context of building from
properly-packaged sources.  By that I mean a tarball that contains
configure et al, and which you build using "./configure; make".

Apparently, it doesn't apply to your case.  But I think that is a
mistake, and I encourage you to educate upstream about "make dist".

-S

-- 
by Rocket to the Moon,
by Airplane to the Rocket,
by Taxi to the Airport,
by Frontdoor to the Taxi,
by throwing back the blanket and laying down the legs ...
- They Might Be Giants



Reply to: