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

Bug#998039: ITP: makedeb -- The modern packaging tool for Debian archives.



Hi!

On Thu, 2021-10-28 at 15:02:19 -0700, Leo Puvilland wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
> Owner: Leo Puvilland <lpuvilla0001@mymail.lausd.net>
> 
> * Package name    : makedeb
>   Version         : 7.1.2+bugfix1
>   Upstream Author : Hunter Wittenborn <hunter@hwittenborn.com>
> * URL             : https://makedeb.hunterwittenborn.com
> * License         : GPLv2
>   Programming Lang: Bash
>   Description     : The modern packaging tool for Debian archives.

Hmm, I think I take issue with this description. :)

While I can agree there's much that can be changed in dpkg and
related tooling such as debhelper to improve packaging workflows and
make this a more integrated and easy thing to approach for new people,
I'm not seeing how makedeb is neither "The" nor "modern" tool for
this. I feel it suffers from pretty much the same problems as fpm
(see <https://github.com/jordansissel/fpm/issues/409> or
<https://bugs.debian.org/688896>).

> makedeb is a packaging tool for Debian-based systems that aims to be
> simple and easy to use, whilst still remaining just as powerful as
> standard Debian tooling.

I'm afraid, simple here implies potentially incorrect (see the comments
on the links about ignoring dependency information from shlibs/symbols
files f.ex), checking the upstream repo I see dependencies are being
hardcoded, which seem even worse than I'd expect. This also implies much
of the current automatic handling found in, say, debhelper and related
tools is skipped, which does not look would make it easier to generate
properly integrated packages.

> makedeb uses a packaging format that's aiming to be simpler and easier
> to get a hold of than standard Debian packaging, so adding this
> program would help more users begin packaging for Debian.

I think this makes the packaging experience even more confusing, as
these people might still need to have to deal with proper Debian
packaging anyway.

Thanks,
Guillem


Reply to: