On Thu, 2009-10-29 at 15:54 +0000, Matthew Johnson wrote: > On Thu Oct 29 15:58, Michael Banck wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 11:37:20AM +0100, Tobi wrote: > > > Are there any serious objections against just overriding and ignoring > > > the Linitan warning about not having "make -f" in the shebang line? > > > > As long as you don't have an objection against having serious bugs filed > > and your packages not be part of a stable Debian release, I guess not. > > put me in the camp that doesn't think this is necessary. If it behaves > precisely the same way as a makefile which does have that shbang line > when compiling the standard Debian package I really don't think there is > a problem with this. > > I'm also against the suggestion which reduces debian/rules to: > > ifeq (....) > include real-debian-rules.mk > else > include alternate-debian-rules.mk > endif > > At least the VDR solution means that if I just care about fixing the > package in normal Debian mode, I can look at Debian rules and see what's > going on, not have to go look at some other file which contains the real > debian/rules.
Not true. If you were not familiar with the special script, you would have to read that entire script to understand what it does. OTOH, in the make-only approach it is easier to discard the contents of alternate-debian-rules.mk entirely (since that special variable is, well, special). -- Saludos, Felipe Sateler -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
