The debian-private mailing list leak, part 1. Volunteers have complained about Blackmail. Lynchings. Character assassination. Defamation. Cyberbullying. Volunteers who gave many years of their lives are picked out at random for cruel social experiments. The former DPL's girlfriend Molly de Blanc is given volunteers to experiment on for her crazy talks. These volunteers never consented to be used like lab rats. We don't either. debian-private can no longer be a safe space for the cabal. Let these monsters have nowhere to hide. Volunteers are not disposable. We stand with the victims.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: A quality relationship

Igor Grubman writes:
-> On Sat, 22 Feb 1997, Larry 'Daffy' Daffner wrote:
-> 
-> > Having said that, I would like to petition again for a standard
-> > template that gives explicit guidance on the trivial cases - those
-> > being  1) a package which uses configure, and 2) X packages with
-> > Imake. Since these 2 cases are generally exceptionally easy to write a
-> > rules file for, it could be reduced to copy the template, uncomment
-> > the lines marked as such, make a control file, and build. (Of course,
-> 
-> Isn't that what deb-make does?  It doesn't provide for Imake, but
-> all that's needed is to add xmkf (commented out) to the build target,
-> right?  Or add an if statement, that would check for presence of Imakefile
-> and then execute xmkf. 

Does debmake provide hints now?  It didn't when I tried it out
last. If it does, then it should provide a hint for Imake programs.
It's relatively easy to write a rules file which thunks the files into
the debian/tmp directory (Just tell make to override DESTDIR for the
make install), but kind of obscure. configure programs are similar,
just override prefix when doing the make install.  If debmake's
template has this now, I'm sorry, if it doesn't it should. However, it
would also be nice to have a generic template for people who prefer
not to use debmake.

-> > more complex packages may require more work, but it's best to start
-> > with the easy case :). 
-> 
-> Yes, that's my way of doing it.  While doing the easy packages, you learn
-> things, which make it easier to package complex packages.  It probably is
-> not possible to have a template rules file for complex package, because
-> all complex packages are complex in their own way :-). 

Well, of course not, and I think that's where debmake is
misguided. Almost every package which has more than a binary, a
manpage, and the required docs has some sort of special need. Rather
than trying to cover every case, like debmake tries to do, it would
probably be better to provide for the common cases and let the
(presumably more intelligent) maintainer deal with the exceptions.

Just my .02, take it for what it's worth.

-Larry


--
  Larry Daffner        |  Linux: Unleash the workstation in your PC!
  vizzie@airmail.net / http://web2.airmail.net/vizzie/
Life is too important to take seriously. -- Corky Siegel


--
Please respect the confidentiality of material on the debian-private list.
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-private-REQUEST@lists.debian.org . Trouble? e-mail to Bruce@Pixar.com