[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#88111: marked as done ([PROPOSAL] Allow debian/rules to not be a makefile)

Your message dated Wed, 26 Apr 2006 09:46:50 -0500
with message-id <87bquobdid.fsf@glaurung.internal.golden-gryphon.com>
and subject line Closing out ancient, fixed bugs
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)

--- Begin Message ---
Package: debian-policy

Previously Anthony Towns wrote:
> It'll have happened during Manoj's incorporation of the packaging-manual
> into policy. See 72949. You'll notice you seconded it... :)

But Manoj said he would remove the non-policy bits from it, and this
would clearly fall in that category imho.
I'll make this a proposal then:

  Section 5.2 of policy currently dictates that debian/rules has to be
  a makefile. While this is good practice, the only thing that is essential
  is that it is an executable that will respond to the build, clean,
  binary, binary-arch and binary-indep targets.

  As such I propose that the statement that debian/rules has be to a
  makefile be removed.


 / Generally uninteresting signature - ignore at your convenience  \
| wichert@cistron.nl                  http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ |
| 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0  2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D |

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Bridge ahead.  Pay troll.
Manoj Srivastava     <srivasta@acm.org>    <http://www.golden-gryphon.com/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C

--- End Message ---

Reply to: