Re: [Pkg-octave-devel] Building octave-interval-doc 3.1.0-2

[Rafael Laboissière <rafael@debian.org>]

* Sébastien Villemot <sebastien@debian.org> [2018-01-02 14:37]:

> On Sun, Dec 31, 2017 at 07:46:54PM +0100, Oliver Heimlich wrote:
> > Would it make sense to build octave-interval-doc only on few architectures 
> > where the build environment has more resources?
>
> The usual solution for this problem is to decouple the build of arch:any 
> packages from that of arch:all ones. This is done by splitting the "build" and 
> "binary" targets of debian/rules into build-arch/binary-arch on one side, and 
> build-indep/binary-indep on the other side (see Debian Policy §4.9).
>
> [snip]
>
> When using dh as we now do, the usual way for doing this is to add -arch and 
> -indep suffixes to overrides, in order to specify that they apply to only one 
> of the two situations (see the dh(1) manpage).
>
> In order to achieve this with our new setup, a modification of octave-pkg-dev 
> is needed. It is not immediately obvious to me how this can be achieved. 
> Rafael, what do you think?

The octave-pkg.mk make scrap currently hijacks the following overrides:

   override_dh_auto_build
   override_dh_auto_install
   override_dh_auto_test
   override_dh_auto_clean

They cannot be used in debian/rules.

As regards adding -arch and -indep overrides to debian/rules, I cannot 
predict the consequences without doing careful tests.

This is something we should keep in mind when writing a proper dh-based 
version of octave-pkg-dev (in the eventuality that we do it).

Rafael