Re: debmake x dh-make

2002-04-04 Thread Junichi Uekawa
On Fri, 5 Apr 2002 10:19:41 +0900 Junichi Uekawa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Oohara Yuuma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cum veritate scripsit: > > > > Are there any statistics somewhere, how many packages use debmake, > > > how many use debhelper and how many use something completely different? > > $ grep

Re: debmake x dh-make

2002-04-04 Thread Joey Hess
> Because it's not. debhelper is not a drop-in replacement for debmake. > > If people use it and someone is willing to maintain it, it will continue > to exist in the distribution, as it happens with every other package. I think that if you survey the set of packages that comtinjue to use debstd,

Re: debmake x dh-make

2002-04-04 Thread Joey Hess
Daniel Ruoso wrote: > > Because it's not. debhelper is not a drop-in replacement for debmake. > > But the question is... shouldn't it be? debhelper used to include a dh_debstd that did more or less the same thing as debstd. After a few years I noticed that noone had ever used it, and removed it.

Re: debmake x dh-make

2002-04-04 Thread Junichi Uekawa
Oohara Yuuma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cum veritate scripsit: > > Are there any statistics somewhere, how many packages use debmake, > > how many use debhelper and how many use something completely different? > $ grep-dctrl -F Build-Depends debmake Sources | egrep '^Package' | wc > 92 18415

Re: debmake x dh-make

2002-04-04 Thread Josip Rodin
On Fri, Apr 05, 2002 at 04:36:58AM +0900, Oohara Yuuma wrote: > > Are there any statistics somewhere, how many packages use debmake, > > how many use debhelper and how many use something completely different? > > $ grep-dctrl -F Build-Depends debmake Sources | egrep '^Package' | wc > 92 1

Re: debmake x dh-make

2002-04-04 Thread Colin Watson
On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 09:08:11PM +0200, Uwe Hermann wrote: > On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 08:49:44PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote: > > On 04 Apr 2002 08:27:05 -0300 > > Daniel Ruoso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Why debmake still remains in the distribution if it's replaced by > > > dh_make? > > >

Re: debmake x dh-make

2002-04-04 Thread Oohara Yuuma
On Thu, 4 Apr 2002 21:08:11 +0200, Uwe Hermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Are there any statistics somewhere, how many packages use debmake, > how many use debhelper and how many use something completely different? $ grep-dctrl -F Build-Depends debmake Sources | egrep '^Package' | wc 92

Re: debmake x dh-make

2002-04-04 Thread Uwe Hermann
Hi. On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 08:49:44PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote: > On 04 Apr 2002 08:27:05 -0300 > Daniel Ruoso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Why debmake still remains in the distribution if it's replaced by > > dh_make? > > Because many packages still depend on it. Are there any statisti

Re: debmake x dh-make

2002-04-04 Thread Colin Watson
On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 01:42:28PM -0300, Daniel Ruoso wrote: > Santiago Vila wrote: > > Because it's not. debhelper is not a drop-in replacement for debmake. > > But the question is... shouldn't it be? They have different design goals. Apart from anything else, debstd is monolithic while debhelp

Re: debmake x dh-make

2002-04-04 Thread Michael Alan Dorman
Daniel Ruoso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Because it's not. debhelper is not a drop-in replacement for debmake. > But the question is... shouldn't it be? NO! debmake was deeply flawed in its interface and implementation, and were debhelper to be a drop-in replacement it would always be fightin

Re: debmake x dh-make

2002-04-04 Thread Daniel Ruoso
> Because it's not. debhelper is not a drop-in replacement for debmake. But the question is... shouldn't it be? Em Qui, 2002-04-04 às 08:50, Santiago Vila escreveu: > Daniel Ruoso wrote: > > Why debmake still remains in the distribution if it's replaced by > > dh_make? > > Because it's not. debh

Re: debmake x dh-make

2002-04-04 Thread Junichi Uekawa
On 04 Apr 2002 08:27:05 -0300 Daniel Ruoso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Why debmake still remains in the distribution if it's replaced by > dh_make? Because many packages still depend on it. regards, junichi -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer -- To UNSUBSCRIBE

Re: debmake x dh-make

2002-04-04 Thread Santiago Vila
Daniel Ruoso wrote: > Why debmake still remains in the distribution if it's replaced by > dh_make? Because it's not. debhelper is not a drop-in replacement for debmake. If people use it and someone is willing to maintain it, it will continue to exist in the distribution, as it happens with every

debmake x dh-make

2002-04-04 Thread Daniel Ruoso
Why debmake still remains in the distribution if it's replaced by dh_make? The question is because I discovered that the script I used to create all the 90 debian packages I maintain (not in the Debian dist, it's in the software house I work for) are built incorrectly, because I used a script that