Alain, On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 01:36:41AM +0200, Alain Kalker wrote: > Kilian, > > On Tue, 2007-10-16 at 23:58 +0200, Kilian Krause wrote: > > you already are able to achive this by plain using the Debian diff.gz file > > with the upstream source tarball and then remove the line "remove_ilbc" > > from debian/patches/00list before running the build. > > Thanks, but I think (haven't tried yet) the build will then fail on the > check-ilbc target, because that specifically checks for the presence of > the src/codec/iLBC directory. Ofcourse removing check-ilbc from the > clean target would fix that, but this adds to the number of steps that > have to be taken after upgrades.
right. That check-ilbc target is in fact the second step to take. But that's as good as it gets. > To make it easier to do this, I was wondering if you could introduce a > make variable like BUILD_DFSG (defaulting to "yes") to control whether > or not DFSG-free packages will be built. This could then be overridden > during build, or perhaps using a value for DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS and a test. > Users can then use the get-orig-source target to automate fetching the > upstream source, editing the patch list for non-DFSG builds or deleting > the iLBC directory for DFSG builds, then do a normal package build. This > might even make the check-ilbc target redundant. Well, no. The get-orig-source reads from debian/changelog and it could be made to autosense the ~dfsg in the version there like pwlib does.. The build flag _could_ circumvent the check-ilbc step and could run a dpatch unpatch remove_ilbc after the patch target (i.e. first in autotools), but this starts becoming pretty hacky. Especially compared to this is 3 manual steps. Sure it's feasible, but OTOH is there such a large user base that want to do this on their own? Agreed I'm willing to rework the get-orig-source target for the next upload to cope with this. But that's about as good as I see a need for it. > Also, packages built from full upstream source will still have the > suffix "-dfsg" in their version strings, which could confuse users, > especially during upgrades. This is a problem with all "-dfsg" packages > at the moment, and I am considering bringing up this topic on the > developers list. Actually I don't see a problem here. -- Best regards, Kilian
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
