Re: [Q] source package building
>>"Aaron" == Aaron Denney <email@example.com> writes:
Aaron> Close, but not quite. I would like 'make install' or similar
Aaron> to build the programs, configuration files, pre/postinst
Aaron> scripts, and then install them, _without_ actually building a
Aaron> .deb binary package file, but still modifying dpkg's view of
Aaron> what is installed.
This is a bad idea. Only one entity should mangle the package
management system's understanding of what is installed on the system,
and that should be the package management system itself. Building
package management tools into each and every debian/rules file is a
recipe for disaster.
Aaron> It just seems silly to pack everything into a .deb file and
Aaron> then have dpkg unpack it to install it. Certainly just going
Aaron> ahead and having it build the binary package and then
Aaron> installing that is feasible, and even fairly easily
Aaron> automatable, but it looks like an unnecessary step.
It is the only acceptable way, though. You never want to have
your package management system so messed up that you have to
re-install from scratch, do you now? This extra step, as you put it,
ensures that only dpkg ever touches dpkg internal data.
dpkg undergoes far stricter scrutiny than most packages
do. And not all maintainers are created equal; I have a great deal
more trust in the competence of the dpkg maintainers than I do for
some others. (also, look at my sig [I luv my rand sig generator])
Things are not as simple as they seems at first. Edward Thorp
Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org> <http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
Trouble? e-mail to email@example.com .