Hello,

On Sat 20 Apr 2024 at 09:00pm +02, Guillem Jover wrote:

> Hi!
>
> On Thu, 2024-03-28 at 09:58:29 +0800, Sean Whitton wrote:
>> On Thu 07 Mar 2024 at 11:22pm +01, Guillem Jover wrote:
>> > diff --git a/policy/ch-source.rst b/policy/ch-source.rst
>> > index 4307e89..2fb05cd 100644
>> > --- a/policy/ch-source.rst
>> > +++ b/policy/ch-source.rst
>> > @@ -685,7 +685,7 @@ variables are also available.
>> >
>> >  The ``debian/substvars`` file is usually generated and modified
>> >  dynamically by ``debian/rules`` targets, in which case it must be
>> > -removed by the ``clean`` target.
>> > +removed by the ``clean`` target (for example with ``dpkg-buildtree 
>> > clean``).
>> >
>> >  See :manpage:`deb-substvars(5)` for full details about source variable
>> >  substitutions, including the format of ``debian/substvars``.
>> > @@ -725,8 +725,9 @@ building packages to record which files are being 
>> > generated.
>> >
>> >  It should not exist in a shipped source package, and so it (and any
>> >  backup files or temporary files such as ``files.new``)  [#]_ should be
>> > -removed by the ``clean`` target. It may also be wise to ensure a fresh
>> > -start by emptying or removing it at the start of the ``binary`` target.
>> > +removed by the ``clean`` target (for example with ``dpkg-buildtree 
>> > clean``).
>> > +It may also be wise to ensure a fresh start by emptying or removing it at 
>> > the
>> > +start of the ``binary`` target.
>> >
>> >  When ``dpkg-gencontrol`` is run for a binary package, it adds an entry
>> >  to ``debian/files`` for the ``.deb`` file that will be created when
>>
>> Instead of "It may also be wise ..." can you use one of the sets of
>> magic words from Policy 1.1, please?
>
> This text was already part of policy and the proposed patch did not
> really touch it, except for wrapping it into a new line. I think
> modifying it feels a bit out-of-scope for this request? But if you
> think it's relevant, and the sentence should be improved as part of
> this, then I'll try to provide some wording. :)

Ah yes, sorry, that is indeed out-of-scope.

-- 
Sean Whitton

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to