Re: Should I always clean in debian/rules before making binary?
frank, can i beg you to doublecheck the way your last name is encoded in
your email client? it corrupts the screen state in pine EVERY time i get
one of your email messages... mutt doesn't get corrupted, but it shows me
a big fat questionmark instead of the letter between "K" and "s" in your
last name... i see that your mails are coming across as latin-1 encoded -
is whatever the second letter of your name is really in that charset?
alternatively, can someone suggest a solution to the screen corruption? i
think what might be happening is that the letter in question is taking two
cells on the screen instead of the ONE that it should take up...
thanks,
elijah
On Mon, 22 Mar 2004, Frank Küster wrote:
> Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 17:03:44 +0100
> From: Frank Küster <frank@debian.org>
> To: debian-mentors@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Should I always clean in debian/rules before making binary?
> Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 10:08:24 -0600 (CST)
> Resent-From: debian-mentors@lists.debian.org
>
> Colin Watson <cjwatson@debian.org> schrieb:
>
> > On Mon, Mar 22, 2004 at 03:19:55PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
> >> - In the install target, you would call something like
> >>
> >> $(MAKE) install prefix=debian/tmp/usr
> >
> > It's easier to use DESTDIR=$(CURDIR)/debian/tmp if DESTDIR support is
> > available; that way you get less confused by /etc.
>
> Ah, you're right. The last package I prepared from scratch doesn't
> install anything into /etc anyway, and my only alone-maintained package
> uses it.
>
> Hm, how do I know (other by trial and error) whether a package supports
> this? autoconf'iscated ones do not use it generally, do they?
>
> >> - From a policy point of view, it doesn't hurt to call clean before
> >> debian/rules binary, but if you do that, I'd do it in debian/rules,
> >> not by hand. However, I recommend not to do it.
> >
> > I'd call it a bug to do that. I believe the buildds, and certainly
> > dpkg-buildpackage, do something morally equivalent to 'debian/rules
> > build && fakeroot debian/rules binary'.
>
> Didn't think about buildds. Only about human ones, also called
> maintainer_in_debugging_building_cycle.
> >
> > Use dpkg-buildpackage (or debuild, a wrapper around it which sorts out
> > fakeroot and the like) rather than 'debian/rules binary'.
>
> The last is a remark to the OP's question, not to me, right? Because
> that's what I meant: Don't make binary depend on clean, because it
> enables you to delete exactly what you want and then run the binary
> target, and dpkg-buildpackage will run clean, anyway.
>
> Regards, Frank
>
Reply to: