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

Bug#508162: marked as done (Please reintegrate the patchsys-quilt.mk from quilt into the CDBS package)



Your message dated Sat, 08 Mar 2025 14:43:46 +0000
with message-id <E1tqvP0-007Exc-Ai@fasolo.debian.org>
and subject line Bug#508162: fixed in cdbs 0.4.168
has caused the Debian Bug report #508162,
regarding Please reintegrate the patchsys-quilt.mk from quilt into the CDBS package
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 this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
508162: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=508162
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: cdbs
Version: 0.4.52
Severity: minor

Dear CDBS-Hackers,

I'd like to know if there is a consensus (i.e. a rule-of-thumb) concerning the order in which the CDBS class and rules files have to be included in debian/rules? -- I am thinking about a statement like "include rules first, then classes"?

If there is such a consensus, what is the recommended order of e.g. rules files among each other in debian/rules? -- I am thinking about a statement like "do allways include debhelper.mk before patchsys-quilt.mk".

Please document the recommended order of the CDBS rules and class makefile fragments somewhere, e.g. in a README file!

My personal idea to deal with this issue is to enumerate the files in their respective directories, e.g. (I don't know if the order is right, it's just a draft example):
	/usr/share/cdbs/1/rules/01-buildcore.mk
	/usr/share/cdbs/1/rules/00-buildvars.mk
	/usr/share/cdbs/1/rules/10-debhelper.mk
	/usr/share/cdbs/1/rules/20-dpatch.mk
	/usr/share/cdbs/1/rules/20-simple-patchsys.mk
	/usr/share/cdbs/1/rules/30-tarball.mk
	/usr/share/cdbs/1/rules/30-utils.mk
respecting the order in which they are supposed to be included in debian/rules. To preserve backwards compatiblity, those enumerated files could be softlinked to the old file names.

The rationale for my request is that today I had to find out that I need to include patchsys.quilt.mk *after* autotools.mk if one of my patches affects to build system to run properly (e.g. to make 'make distclean' work again). This behaviour is documented nowhere -- at least I haven't found anything in the cdbs documentation.
	
Thank you very much!

Cheers,
Fabian

--
Dipl.-Phys. Fabian Greffrath

Ruhr-Universität Bochum
Lehrstuhl für Energieanlagen und Energieprozesstechnik (LEAT)
Universitätsstr. 150, IB 3/134
D-44780 Bochum

Telefon: +49 (0)234 / 32-26334
Fax:     +49 (0)234 / 32-14227
E-Mail:  greffrath@leat.ruhr-uni-bochum.de



--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Source: cdbs
Source-Version: 0.4.168
Done: Alexandre Detiste <tchet@debian.org>

We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
cdbs, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive.

A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is
attached.

Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed.  If you
have further comments please address them to 508162@bugs.debian.org,
and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate.

Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Alexandre Detiste <tchet@debian.org> (supplier of updated cdbs package)

(This message was generated automatically at their request; if you
believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive
administrators by mailing ftpmaster@ftp-master.debian.org)


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

Format: 1.8
Date: Sat, 08 Mar 2025 14:48:42 +0100
Source: cdbs
Architecture: source
Version: 0.4.168
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Debian QA Group <packages@qa.debian.org>
Changed-By: Alexandre Detiste <tchet@debian.org>
Closes: 414305 508162 525869 554855
Changes:
 cdbs (0.4.168) unstable; urgency=medium
 .
   * QA upload.
   * Remove dpatch.mk, simple-patchsys.mk and tarball.mk
     that were deprecated since 2010 and have no user left.
   * Also remove related utility cdbs-edit-patch.
     Closes: #414305, #554855, #508162, #525869
Checksums-Sha1:
 f0fa1a8f8e9d0aa713ac0e58b58465ba7c954987 1723 cdbs_0.4.168.dsc
 28c24e44ff6a094be53936087743c470eb5dda39 189020 cdbs_0.4.168.tar.xz
 6e48c81ec5a536bfdaff7168c1ba7166086e6556 4562 cdbs_0.4.168_source.buildinfo
Checksums-Sha256:
 0787f4b79ec0932cd4b293e4eddc75e2dd8343796c4c22753be309839771461a 1723 cdbs_0.4.168.dsc
 93c7d530b4130265efdd136a4c3d29294b8c660d14de0537d8a0b9a26e0b4a46 189020 cdbs_0.4.168.tar.xz
 998143e1aa260fc0d853e817416b070203210bbd280e5df1c31f2068fb4d91ba 4562 cdbs_0.4.168_source.buildinfo
Files:
 219dc7f13d90ef5f57320f184a44afc9 1723 devel optional cdbs_0.4.168.dsc
 005f57d6f06144f2e4a860f4c258aa9f 189020 devel optional cdbs_0.4.168.tar.xz
 227ab640a027393cf1e39e14482741c9 4562 devel optional cdbs_0.4.168_source.buildinfo

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=gqap
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Attachment: pgpzunbL3RqSu.pgp
Description: PGP signature


--- End Message ---

Reply to: