Re: dh 7 broken by design?

[George Danchev <danchev@spnet.net>]

On Tuesday 17 February 2009 14:35:27 Helmut Grohne wrote:

Hi,

> > Can you give an example of a ???debian/rules??? that does not work, and
> > what the desired behaviour would be?
>
> Well my basic idea was to add a .PHONY line to the 3-line example like:
>
> #!/usr/bin/make -f
> %:
> 	$@
> .PHONY:build clean install binary-arch binary-indep binary

There is no way of knowing in advance how a particilar .PHONY should look 
like, thus it is left to the user to decide on per package basis and populate 
it as well. You can hardly blame dh scripts about the lack of artificial 
intelligence.

> This rules file is semantically equivalent to an empty one. The
> intention was to force make to build everything even though files like
> clean or build may exist.
>
> BTW: This gets even worse with Joey's plans for future dh improvements
> like override_foo targets. Even though it is less probable that a file
> named like that exists it creates a bunch of more "forbidden" files.

citation needed...

-- 
pub 4096R/0E4BD0AB 2003-03-18 <people.fccf.net/danchev/key pgp.mit.edu>