Goswin von Brederlow <goswin-...@web.de> writes: > What automatic reversal? There is no automatic reversal. The default > state of source is with patches applied.
Hmm. I have overlooked this when reading bug report #649531. The order how the steps are applied, is clearly: 1. patch the sources 2. build the package If you want to reverse this, one clearly should to it in reverse order: 1. cleanup from the build process 2. unpatch the sources Unpatching the sources *before* the build process was cleaned up makes no sense to me at all. Could you provide a use case for that? > Wether debuild <target> should apply patches before running the target > is arguable. But lets say it does apply patches before the target and > then restores the source to the state it was before after the > target. What happens if you now call > > debuild patch > > to apply the patches in a 3.0 (quilt) package that has patch/unpatch > targets? > > Patches would be applied before that patch target is called, then patch > is called and does nothing (or fails) and then patches are unapplied > again to restore the original state. > > Not what you want. A "patch" target would contradict your statement > dpkg-source leaves the source in the same state it finds it before > build. because it does *not* leave the sources in the same state. Cheers Ole -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/ytz4nrg8at2....@news.ole.ath.cx
