On Thu, 21 Sep 2006, Joey Hess wrote: > > I this raised the question on debian-qa and the opinion there seemed > > to be that the "clean" target not be faulted for removing such files. > > That's not how I read the short thread; you got one suggestion to remove the > autogenerated files in the clean target (a suggestion I agree with), and one > response verifying that the method you proposed using to deal with it would > work.
I was not sufficiently clear in response to the first sugestion. Removal of the autogenerated files *is* what the "clean" target already does. The problem is that upstream source comes with its own set of autogenerated files and these get removed/replaced during the autoconf run. The solution of switching over to a "dbs" type build is (as far as I can see) beyond the scope of an NMU. > FWIW, policy says: I read that and have since then been going through my own packages trying to implement it. Since upstream is often not careful enough about "distclean", this requirement is sometimes rather hard to implement. > Note the "must" which is presumably why Bastian filed this bug as serious, > although I don't actually agree that it's release critical for a package > to minimise its diff. I think the reasons for the "must" ought be made a little more clear. But where will these reasons be? In the developer's reference perhaps. Regards, Kapil. --
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
