Re: Bug#397939: Proposal: Packages must have a working clean target
On Fri, Nov 10, 2006 at 10:48:15AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Stephen Gran <sgran@debian.org> writes:
> As previously discussed, it's very difficult to comply with this directive
> as written if one is following the autotools-dev recommendations for how
> to regenerate the various autotools files. Before putting too much weight
> on this directive, I'd really like to find some way of reconciling that,
> since right now it's a frequently-violated dictate of Policy.
>
> Certainly, though, being unable to build a package twice is a bug that
> should be reported against that package. (I actually don't know if any of
> my packages have this problem; some of them have so many build
> dependencies that I always build them in pbuilder chroot. Hm.)
I already proposed we change policy to require that doing
debian/rules clean
debian/rules binary
debian/rules clean
restore the tree to the state after the first "debian/rules clean"
providing no packages were installed or upgraded in between.
This way, it is allowable for debian/rules clean to remove or change
files shipped in the tarball providing this is idempotent.
(dpkg-buildpackage run debian/rules clean begore building the package
by default).
I also proposed a different way to deal with config.guess/config.sub
that comply with the current policy.
Cheers,
--
Bill. <ballombe@debian.org>
Imagine a large blue swirl here.
Reply to: