On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 09:37:03AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 02:00:04PM +0200, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > it seems that my idea is not well received; point taken, and I do like
> > the alternative about debian/rules creating debian/control in the clean
>
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 02:00:04PM +0200, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> it seems that my idea is not well received; point taken, and I do like
> the alternative about debian/rules creating debian/control in the clean
> target.
Do. Not. Do. That.
Ever.
if you do, you risk all kinds of proble
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 11:04:00AM +0200, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> Hi Bernd,
>
> Am Donnerstag, den 14.06.2012, 10:32 +0200 schrieb Bernd Zeimetz:
> > > I would like to see more flexibility in dpkg-source as to where the
> > > effective build depends come from. My use case are (as you might guess
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 01:39:05PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> I think that the sources-subvars target must function without any
> Build-Depends-(Indep) installed because otherwise:
Just as an aside, we now have Build-Depends-Arch in addition to
Build-Depends-Indep. This means that Build
Le 17/06/2012 14:00, Joachim Breitner a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> it seems that my idea is not well received; point taken, and I do like
> the alternative about debian/rules creating debian/control in the clean
> target.
Modifying debian/control within the clean target of debian/rules would
lead to lots
Hi,
it seems that my idea is not well received; point taken, and I do like
the alternative about debian/rules creating debian/control in the clean
target.
Nevertheless :-)
Am Sonntag, den 17.06.2012, 13:39 +0200 schrieb Goswin von Brederlow:
> I think that the sources-subvars target must functio
Joachim Breitner writes:
> Hi,
>
> Am Donnerstag, den 14.06.2012, 11:10 +0200 schrieb Bernd Zeimetz:
>> > The only problem I see with this is that if the build dependencies can
>> > only be calculated after a full build, building source and binaries
>> > requires two builds (and a third one if de
On 12-06-14 at 11:13am, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Am Donnerstag, den 14.06.2012, 11:10 +0200 schrieb Bernd Zeimetz:
> > > The only problem I see with this is that if the build dependencies
> > > can only be calculated after a full build, building source and
> > > binaries requires two bu
Hi,
Am Donnerstag, den 14.06.2012, 11:10 +0200 schrieb Bernd Zeimetz:
> > The only problem I see with this is that if the build dependencies can
> > only be calculated after a full build, building source and binaries
> > requires two builds (and a third one if debuild -tc is used). (Maybe
> > less
On 06/14/2012 11:04 AM, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> Hi Bernd,
>
> Am Donnerstag, den 14.06.2012, 10:32 +0200 schrieb Bernd Zeimetz:
>>> I would like to see more flexibility in dpkg-source as to where the
>>> effective build depends come from. My use case are (as you might guess)
>>> Haskell packages
Hi Bernd,
Am Donnerstag, den 14.06.2012, 10:32 +0200 schrieb Bernd Zeimetz:
> > I would like to see more flexibility in dpkg-source as to where the
> > effective build depends come from. My use case are (as you might guess)
> > Haskell packages. If you look at
> > http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/
Hi,
> I would like to see more flexibility in dpkg-source as to where the
> effective build depends come from. My use case are (as you might guess)
> Haskell packages. If you look at
> http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/pool/main/h/haskell-yesod/haskell-yesod_1.0.1.6-1.dsc
> you see it has a very lo
12 matches
Mail list logo
