Manoj Srivastava schrieb:
1. SPECIAL_VDR_SUFFIX=devel make -f debian/rules build 2. make -f debian/rules SPECIAL_VDR_SUFFIX=devel build 3. SPECIAL_VDR_SUFFIX=devel ./debian/rules build 4. ./debian/rules SPECIAL_VDR_SUFFIX=devel build Giving you differing results is confusing enough to anyone building the packages manually (You know, as free software folks, the buildds are not the sole focus of our packaging) that I think it is good that the policy is specific enough to block these.
I just don't think this is a problem at all. If you use SPECIAL_VDR_SUFFIX=devel, you do this for a reason. It's very specific for this set of packages and without reading the documentation, you wouldn't even consider setting SPECIAL_VDR_SUFFIX=devel. And if you read the documentation, you know exactly, how to use SPECIAL_VDR_SUFFIX.
In general: IMHO the policy shouldn't force implementation details, it should just enforce the interface.
But as I wrote earlier: case closed, everything has been said - we will try to come up with another solution to satisfy the policy, even if it is uglier and requires some more brain cycles to be understood.
Tobias -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
