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

Re: pbuilder --build --binary-arch invokes 'build' target



    Hi,

thanks for valuable comments, now it makes more sense to me. The problem was
that my 'build:' target is dependent on build-arch and build-indep targets (as
generated by dh_make when I started with the project). When pbuilder invokes
'debian/rules build', both these targets are called.

I looked at text4ht's debian/rules and there you simply commented out the
'build:' target. I tried the same thing and it works nicely.
(My original debian/rules, without this modification, is here:
 http://git.debian.org/?p=debian-science/packages/eprover.git;a=blob;f=debian/rules;hb=master )

Now I'm just concerned about (violating) Debian Policy (Sect. 4.9). It states
that the 'build:' target is mandatory. Should I leave 'build:' commented out,
possibly violating the policy, or perhaps include it just empty, removing its
dependencies on 'build-arch' and 'build-indep', so that the policy is
satisfied?

    With best regards,
    Petr

On Wed, May 06, 2009 at 02:31:52AM +0530, Kapil Hari Paranjape wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> On Tue, 05 May 2009, Petr Pudlak wrote:
> > The problem is that if pbuilder is invoked with --binary-arch, it still tries
> > to build the whole project, including the documentation (indep). It looks to me as if the problem
> > is with pbuilder (or with the tools it's invoking), but of course the problem
> > might as well be my ignorance.
> 
> If you invoke "pbuilder --binary-arch" then it in turn invokes
> "debian/rules binary-arch". So it looks as if your binary-arch target
> is running the complete "build" target.
> 
> In the case of the "tex4ht" package I have chosen to create two
> targets "build-arch" and "build-indep" which are invoked by the
> appropriate "binary-*" targets. You can browse the SVN repo of the
> debian directory of the tex4ht package on svn.debian.org
>  http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/collab-maint/deb-maint/tex4ht/trunk/debian/rules
> to see this.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Kapil.
> --
> 



Reply to: