Hi Raphael, sorry for the delay. Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Wed, 01 Jul 2009, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: >> I'm implementing automatic creation of debug packages, and to generate >> their binary control file I'm using dpkg-gencontrol. The debug package >> are not listed in debian/control, and thus when calling dpkg-gencontrol >> I get something like: >> >> $ dpkg-gencontrol -DPackage=foo -pfoo >> dpkg-gencontrol: error: package foo not in control info >> >> Since I'm adding the field "Package: foo" using -D, I'd expect that to >> work. >> >> What do you think? I'm willing to provide patches if you think this is >> or might be a good idea. > > I think this is crazy. The entry for package foo would be mostly empty anyway.
My idea was to fill it with several -D options. The source entries would be inherited from the source stanza of the control file. > I suggest you generate another file (copying it and extending it as > required) and you use the -c option of dpkg-gencontrol to use that file > instead of debian/control. That file can even be a temporary file outside > of the source tree. That sounds too hacky and I want to avoid it. Right now I'm facking it from stdin but then I miss the source fields. > Generating binary control files for non-referenced packages could be a new > feature, but it would be a new option and would not be based on a hack > like you suggest: dpkg-gencontrol --dynamic -pfoo. > > This would fail if the the package foo is listed in the control file. That sounds good. It's similar to defining a new package with -D, so I'm happy with it. It should work with more -D options defined for that new package. Something like dpkg-gencontrol --dynamic -pfoo -DSection=debug -DPriority=extra -Dblah -c debian/control > Would that really be useful compared to creating another control file > dynamically ? I think so :) My use case is ddeb creation for packages not listed in debian/control, fwiw. Thanks for your consideration, Emilio
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
