* Miguel de Val-Borro <miguel.de...@gmail.com>, 2011-12-03, 16:32:
--- numexpr-1.4.2/debian/rules 2011-04-07 04:10:59.000000000 +0200 +++ numexpr-1.4.2/debian/rules 2011-12-03 12:13:42.000000000 +0100 @@ -19,4 +19,7 @@ install/$(DEB_PYTHON_MODULE_PACKAGES):: sed -i 's#\#!/usr/bin/python[0-9].[0-9]#\#!/usr/bin/python#' \ $(cdbs_python_destdir)usr/bin/* + +build/python-numexpr:: + dh_numpy # rm -f $(cdbs_python_destdir)usr/share/doc/python-numexpr/LICENSE.txtThat's an unusual place to call dh_numpy (or any helper that generates dependencies). The patch happens to do the trick for the moment, but only because dh_numpy is quite dumb and doesn't look at package contents. If dh_numpy ever grows smarter, this package will break.Would it be correct to call dh_numpy under the install rule? install/python-numexpr:: dh_numpyWhen the package is built like that it also has the right dependency on numpy.
AFAICS, yes, that'd be correct. -- Jakub Wilk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
