Re: A standard patch rule for our rules

2009-07-02 Thread Andreas Metzler
Ben Finney wrote: [...] > It seems to me that the whole point of adding ‘patch’ as a (phony) > target is to allow a dependency on that target, [...] Hello, Being used as dependencies of non-phony targets is the one thing phony targets are not useful for. A phony dependency is always out of date

Re: A standard patch rule for our rules

2009-07-01 Thread Russ Allbery
Ben Finney writes: > Charles Plessy writes: >> Unfortunately, it seems that with quilt, it is better ot use >> $(QUILT_STAMPFN) in order to avoid a target to become phony. > What's wrong with having a phony target? We already have many of them, > and a standard way of dealing with them: as depe

Re: A standard patch rule for our rules

2009-07-01 Thread Ben Finney
Charles Plessy writes: > Le Wed, Jul 01, 2009 at 07:43:37PM +0200, Andreas Metzler a écrit : > > "patch" indeded is the standard way nowadays. See policy 4.9. > > Unfortunately, it seems that with quilt, it is better ot use > $(QUILT_STAMPFN) in order to avoid a target to become phony. What's w

Re: A standard patch rule for our rules

2009-07-01 Thread Charles Plessy
Le Wed, Jul 01, 2009 at 07:43:37PM +0200, Andreas Metzler a écrit : > Rafael Almeida wrote: > > A ``patch'' rule for debian/rules there should always be > > for I'd like to easily apply patches created by me > > Don't worry I don't think of anything too hard > > a simple standarization will ease m

Re: A standard patch rule for our rules

2009-07-01 Thread James Vega
On Wed, Jul 01, 2009 at 07:43:37PM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote: > Rafael Almeida wrote: > > A ``patch'' rule for debian/rules there should always be > > for I'd like to easily apply patches created by me > > Don't worry I don't think of anything too hard > > a simple standarization will ease my h

Re: A standard patch rule for our rules

2009-07-01 Thread Andreas Metzler
Rafael Almeida wrote: > A ``patch'' rule for debian/rules there should always be > for I'd like to easily apply patches created by me > Don't worry I don't think of anything too hard > a simple standarization will ease my heart > Today ``debian/rules build'' is always a good match > but there's n

Re: A standard patch rule for our rules

2009-07-01 Thread Paul Wise
Nice poem :) -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: A standard patch rule for our rules

2009-07-01 Thread Goswin von Brederlow
Rafael Almeida writes: > A ``patch'' rule for debian/rules there should always be > for I'd like to easily apply patches created by me > Don't worry I don't think of anything too hard > a simple standarization will ease my heart > > Today ``debian/rules build'' is always a good match > but there'