Dnia wtorek, 27 lipca 2010 o 14:03:57 Loïc Minier napisał(a): > On Tue, Jul 27, 2010, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote: > > And here I have a problem. How much of debian/ directory should be > > provided in *-source binary packages? Minimal set just to be able to > > call "dpkg- buildpackage -b" and get wanted output or rather > > everything just in case? > So currently, various -source packages do various things; some > -source packages ship the upstream tarball + patches separately, other > ship a patched upstream tarball, and in one case it's upstream tarball > + patches + some rules file to apply them.
You forgot about binutils which ships patched sources tarball + patches. > I personally find that very inelegant and inconsistent. > Since we can't build-depend on the "source of this package", what I > would find elegant and consistent would be to ship the .dsc + any files > it references in the -source package. This is guaranteed to convey the > full source, we'd have an unified interface for unpacking (dpkg-source > -x), and we could call the build as usual. > However, there is no guarantee that the .dsc is in ../ during the > build of toolchain packages. In my experience, it is there though. Probably depends on a way of building it. In my builds I did lot of "dpkg-source -x ../../../source/gcc-4.4<TAB>.dsc" calls. > What I'd recommend is copying over ../$source_$version.dsc and files it > references into the -source binary package; if someone isn't happy > about reading from ../, or has a better idea, they will speak up :-) So we are back at my question again. Regards, -- JID: h...@jabber.org Website: http://marcin.juszkiewicz.com.pl/ LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/marcinjuszkiewicz _______________________________________________ linaro-toolchain mailing list linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-toolchain
