On Mon, 2009-05-04 at 07:35 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > On Fri, 2009-03-13 at 21:04:30 +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > we have an unfortunate situation where the practice in dpkg-buildpackage > > and the policy do not match fully.
... > So I think for next dpkg upload we should make dpkg-buildpackage stop > setting any flags by default, and switch the setting to go through the > command line arguments to override the package options instead of the > environment, so this would become the user override part. The > DEB_VENDOR env var should not be set either, and we should work on > getting a dpkg-vendor instead, before people try to start using the > variable. > > > Then if we get consensus that this is the righ path, agree on the > makefile names (as once decided it will be a pain to change later on > in all packages), we'll need to ship the distro defaults file > somewhere and start fixing packages to include that makefile. The > files could look something like: > > ,-- /usr/share/dpkg/build-options.mk > # distro defaults > FOO := distro > > -include /etc/dpkg/build-options.mk > `-- > > ,-- /etc/dpkg/build-options.mk > # site overrides > #FOO := site > `-- > > ,-- debian/rules > -include /usr/share/dpkg/build-options.mk > > # package overrides > FOO := pkg > `-- > > ,-- command line > # user overrides > $ make -f debian/rules FOO=cmd That was really a very well-spent two months! +1 from me :-) Regards, Andrew. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ andrew (AT) morphoss (DOT) com +64(272)DEBIAN You will be advanced socially, without any special effort on your part. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org