Re: RFS: ustr
Neil Williams wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 13:07:16 +0100
> Bernd Zeimetz <bernd@bzed.de> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> first thing I can recommend: Don't use cdbs for that. That just doesn't
>> work for building proper library packages.
>
> Bunkum!!!
:)
> CDBS is fine for all packages if the maintainer chooses to use it.
Ok, let's not start a cdbs flamewar here, I'm probably way too annoyed
by cdbs (except for very simple python packages).
As cdbs doesn't seem to take care of building the source twice, with and
without -fPIC, so I have to handcraft a lot of stuff in the rules file
anyway - then the sense of using cdbs is gone for me.
> > Chances are good that a -dbg package would make more sense then this
> > > debug library weirdness.
> And is soon to be mandated by policy.
I hope in a way which doesn't end up in a huge waste of space on every
mirror.
--
Bernd Zeimetz
<bernd@bzed.de> <http://bzed.de/>
Reply to: