On Tue, 09 Oct 2007, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: > Obviously one could attempt to merge in new features especially from > debuild which reimplements dpkg-buildpackage but with many fancy > additions. (While e.g. pbuilder and sbuild wrap dpkg-buildpackage but > do not replace it) > > On the other hand one could argue that dpkg-buildpackage should > intentionally remain simple and that people are expected to write > their own wrappers or replacements if they need.
I think this needs to be evaluated on a feature-by-feature basis. Some features should be handled in a standardized ways while some corner-case features are better left to external wrappers. It depends on how much creativity a given feature requires... when there's only one right way to do it, it should be in dpkg-buildpackage, otherwise it can be easily left out. Like Julian, I think package signatures ought to be handled at this level because only one implementation is really needed IMO. Also now that you offered a command line option (-j) for DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS="parallel=<n>", I think it would make sense to offer similar options for other common options like "debug,nostrip" (#154468). #4655 (checking versions in changelogs, if we do it) would also be a waste if it was reimplemented in various wrappers. BTW, with the BTS using the historical changelog information for its version tracking, it probably makes sense to do it. Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog Premier livre français sur Debian GNU/Linux : http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]