Re: Bug#216492: FTBFS (unstable/all) missing build-dep
On Wed, Oct 22, 2003 at 01:56:10PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2003 at 11:09:23AM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > > dpkg-buildpackage and policy over. Note that it will break in pretty
> > > much the same way as #216492 (subject of this thread) if the rules
> > > file has not been converted to your scheme.
> >
> > It will not break anything:
> >
> > 1) old debian/rules, new dpkg-buildpackages:
> >
> > debian/rules build BUILD=build-arch
> >
> > since BUILD is not used in debian/rules, this is equivalent to
> > debian/rules build
> > which is OK.
>
> Did you read what I wrote? Or bug #216492?
I am afraid you are right, I solved the wrong problem.
But explaining your point a bit more verbosely would not harm
anybody and prevent such mistake, I expect.
So I come up with a different proposal:
Introducing a new file, say debian/rules.version.
If this file does not exist, we declare that version=0,
else version=`cat debian/rules.version`.
Currently 2 versions are defined:
0: debian/rules support rules described as mandatory by policy.
1: as 0, but debian/rules also support build-arch and build-indep.
Future version of policy can define higher version.
dpkg-buildpackage just need to read this file before deciding
whether it can call debian/rules build-arch.
What do you think ?
Cheers,
--
Bill. <ballombe@debian.org>
Imagine a large red swirl here.
Reply to: