Re: Fully debhelper-based build infrastructure
* Rafael Laboissière <rafael@debian.org> [2018-01-12 23:43]:
* Mike Miller <mtmiller@debian.org> [2018-01-12 14:07]:
What do you think about having a clean function (as you have it now)
versus a dh_octave_clean helper? Is it better to have fine grained
explicit helper scripts or only when the steps become complex?
I have no strong opinion on this. For now, the action of the clean
function in Buildsystem/octave.pm are pretty simple, so let us keep it
like that.
I have looked deeper in this issue. In the CDBS-based infrastructure,
originally implemented by octave-pkg-dev, we took care of the environment
variable DEB_MAKE_CLEAN_TARGET. Three packages make currently use of
this feature:
$ grep DEB_MAKE octave-*/*/debian/rules
octave-interval/octave-interval/debian/rules:DEB_MAKE_CLEAN_TARGET = -f debian/rules debian-clean
octave-nan/octave-nan/debian/rules:DEB_MAKE_CLEAN_TARGET = -f debian/rules clean-files
octave-octclip/octave-octclip/debian/rules:DEB_MAKE_CLEAN_TARGET = -C src cleanall
We msut include support for it in dh-octave. Since this will make the
code in Buildsystem/octave.pm become more complex, I am planning to
create a separate script called dh_octave_clean, as Mike suggested.
Now, I am wondering whether we should keep the name of the variable
DEB_MAKE_CLEAN_TARGET (which is specific to CDBS) or change it to
something like DH_OCTAVE_CLEAN_TARGET (what indicates that this is a
dh-octave-specific variable). What do you think?
Rafael
Reply to: