On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 09:12:37PM +1000, Ben Finney wrote: > Roger Leigh <email@example.com> writes: > > > On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 08:23:42AM +1000, Ben Finney wrote: > > > Kilian Krause <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes: > > > > > > > Hi Ben, > > > > > > > > On Tue, 2011-07-26 at 17:10 +1000, Ben Finney wrote: > > > > > Lintian recommends (via tag ‘debian-rules-missing-recommended-target’): > > > > > > > > > > ===== > > > > > N: Note that the following form is recommended however: > > > > > N: > > > > > N: build: build-arch build-indep > > > > > N: build-arch: build-stamp > > > > > N: build-indep: build-stamp > > > > > N: build-stamp: > > > > > N: build here > > > > > ===== > […] > > > > Should Lintian's recommendation be changed? > > > > Quite possibly, I'm sure the lintian maintainers would be happy to > > have improved help text. I didn't write it with dh in mind > > Okay. (Thanks for writing it.) > > If you were to write it with ‘dh’ in mind, what would be the recommended > set of explicit targets? Errrr... just "%", I guess :) Unless your rules file *needs* something else - and in this case, it very much depends on what exactly your rules file needs. If you only use the override_* targets, then you don't need to do anything else - just override the specific stages as needed and dh(1) will do the rest by itself. If you *need* to override any of the "build", "binary", "build-*" or "binary-*" targets, then you'd have to be careful to not cause any dependency loops - e.g. don't make "build-indep" depend on "build" without also specifying the "build" target, because "dh build" will run "debian/rules build-indep" and loop around :) That's basically all, IMHO. > > The main problems with > > build-arch: build > > build-indep: build > > I'm not sure who suggested that; it doesn't seem to be in this thread. > > > since dh works with build-arch and build-indep automatically since > > 8.1.0 > > Ah, thank you. I now need to increase the ‘debhelper’ dependency and > ‘compat’ level to correctly rely on its support for those targets. > > > and since 8.9.0 with v9 compatibility mode, dh supports proper > > overriding of sequences with make targets. But unless you're doing > > something really different, you shouldn't need to specify any build > > rules at all > > Both of those are rather too much magic. One of the great benefits of > using debhelper( as opposed to CDBS) is that one can look at a > ‘debian/rules’ file without specific knowledge about debhelper, and see > at least what commands will be run when. > > So, if Lintian is going to recommend these targets, what text would make > it a suitable recommendation for both no-helper and ‘debhelper’ rules > styles? G'luck, Peter -- Peter Pentchev email@example.com roam@FreeBSD.org firstname.lastname@example.org PGP key: http://people.FreeBSD.org/~roam/roam.key.asc Key fingerprint FDBA FD79 C26F 3C51 C95E DF9E ED18 B68D 1619 4553 If I were you, who would be reading this sentence?
Description: Digital signature