Re: RFS: ustr
On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 01:31:44PM +0000, Neil Williams wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 13:07:16 +0100
> Bernd Zeimetz <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > first thing I can recommend: Don't use cdbs for that. That just doesn't
> > work for building proper library packages.
I hope not started flamewar there.
> CDBS is fine for all packages if the maintainer chooses to use it.
> I maintain a couple of libraries with CDBS and a couple with debhelper.
> There are no problems with using either method, providing they are
> used properly.
> Take a look at the source for libqof1 and tell me that CDBS cannot work
> for a *proper* library package.
It was really my decision, to not strip -debug flavour of a libustr.
I decided for including libustr-debug-1.0-1 & libustr-debug-dev, because
upstream author do rpm packages for these. CDBS is nice in its
simplicity I think.
-dbg package with extracted debugging symbols was already there.
I'm excluding -debug stuff now.
I must fix upstream Makefile to not build DBG flavour of lib, as it could
be wasting of resources and time.
> > Chances are good that a -dbg package would make more sense then this
> > debug library weirdness.
> And is soon to be mandated by policy.
> CDBS will do this for you if you create the entry in debian/control.
Yes it was here already and cdbs created -dbg package.
-debug was another build flavour of ustr.