On Thu, Sep 08, 2011 at 10:43:44AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote: > I can provide a concrete practical reason for requiring make as the > implementation language: at least one, probably two, of the options for > build-arch handling > (http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=629385#93) require > debian/rules to be a Makefile. The leave package might be able to get > away with a little bit more if its exit code matched that of make for > nonexisting targets, mentioned in policy 4.9; however, it exits 1 rather > than 2 in this case. I realise that this may be because you are unable > to upload new versions with the shell implementation.
Although actually, Steve pointed out in message #119 that make will exit 2 when presented with a shell script, so option 1 would work for the leave package. Nevertheless, merely having that doubt in developers' minds is a cost; 17058 packages can definitely use this technique, while for 1 package we have to think about it ... so I would still want to hear of a clear benefit to allowing this flexibility. Regards, -- Colin Watson [cjwat...@debian.org] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
