On Thu, 8 Sep 2011 16:18:50 +0200, Josip Rodin <j...@debbugs.entuzijast.net> 
wrote:
> > If you ignore all transitions constraints, sure. At the same time, Debian
> > decided debian/rules must be a Makefile and you're not adjusting to cope.
> 
> No, "Debian" did not decide to explicitly ban non-shell rules files at any
> point in time, it was a leftover from a text conversion that never got
> fixed.

You can say that and it may be literally true, but my own interpretation
of history is that we never anticipated debian/rules being anything
*other* than a makefile and thus an unintended loophole existed that
eventually got closed.

While I understand and appreciate your arguments, I personally see no
practical value in having debian/rules be anything other than a
makefile, and lots of reasons that having it always be a makefile is
useful. 

Bdale

Attachment: pgpJy0M9qcyFA.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to