Mattia Rizzolo writes ("Bug#910687: dgit: crash with perl backtrace"): > On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 11:51:24AM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > > That seems coherent. Unless you think --include-dirty should turn > > --clean=check into --clean=none ? That seems unwise. > > ACK > > > Consider --clean=dpkg-source --ignore-dirty, which means to run the > > rules clean target and then tolerate uncommitted stuff. > > That's -wd/-wdd. Mhh, You have a point here, I should try that in the > future. I like -wc because it's impossibly quick and usually it's the > state I find myself in while working.
Err, sorry, when I said "consider" I meant "think about this case in the context of the interaction between --clean=* and --ignore-dirty". Not "please think about using -wd yourself". -wd is v. annoying :-). It's slow and with anyone else's package it's likely to be buggy too. Now that we have version control and *ignore files, clean targets in makefiles are IMO obsolete. > > I think this is because the algorithm used by dgit for quilt > > linearisation implicitly assumes that it can use the > > debian/source/format from your git tree. I think trying to work with > > an uncommitted change to debian/source/format is sufficiently weird > > that I don't mind that it goes wrong. > > That's a fair assumption. > You mentioned somewhere that you could add at least a warning when > d/source/format has uncommitted changes (or is present but untracked). > I think I would find that useful. OK, thanks for the feedback. I'll see if that is straightforward. > > --include-dirty, maybe something like this: > > > > Changes not committed to git are not taken into account by dgit's > > quilt fixup (see `FORMAT 3.0 (QUILT)' in dgit(7). So you may need > > to run dpkg-source --commit yourself. > > > > ? > > I must admit that I haven't recently read dgit's documnetation (as I did > last year, and costantly re-reading documentation you already read is > quite boring), so I wouldn't have noticed. > But perhaps making that point explicit could help others in the future. Hah :-). Thanks for your input. Ian.