debian-de...@liska.ath.cx (Olе Streicher) writes:
Goswin von Brederlow goswin-...@web.de writes:
debian-de...@liska.ath.cx (Ole Streicher) writes:
I think the best way would be that debuild/dpkg-buildpackage would not
automatically unapply the patches (so it would leave the source in the
debian-de...@liska.ath.cx (Olе Streicher) writes:
Goswin von Brederlow goswin-...@web.de writes:
If you need to change a file then that means that file isn't source
anymore but generated. Try switching to out-of-tree builds if you have
something like that.
What is the advantage of that?
Goswin von Brederlow goswin-...@web.de writes:
debian-de...@liska.ath.cx (Ole Streicher) writes:
I think the best way would be that debuild/dpkg-buildpackage would not
automatically unapply the patches (so it would leave the source in the
It doesn't automatically unapply the patches. It only
Goswin von Brederlow goswin-...@web.de writes:
If you need to change a file then that means that file isn't source
anymore but generated. Try switching to out-of-tree builds if you have
something like that.
What is the advantage of that? From the Debian policy, I don't see a
need why sources
debian-de...@liska.ath.cx (Olе Streicher) writes:
Goswin von Brederlow goswin-...@web.de writes:
debian-de...@liska.ath.cx (Olõ Streicher) writes:
James McCoy vega.ja...@gmail.com writes:
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 04:23:05PM +0200, Olõ Streicher wrote:
Unpatching the sources *before*
debian-de...@liska.ath.cx (Olе Streicher) writes:
James McCoy vega.ja...@gmail.com writes:
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 04:23:05PM +0200, Olе Streicher wrote:
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?
As
Hi,
Le 18/05/12 13:46, Goswin von Brederlow a écrit :
This works only for the special case that build does not change any
source file. Otherwise you would also commit the changed source files.
And it better not. There is no excuse for changing source files during
build. If you need to
Goswin von Brederlow goswin-...@web.de writes:
debian-de...@liska.ath.cx (Olе Streicher) writes:
James McCoy vega.ja...@gmail.com writes:
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 04:23:05PM +0200, Olе Streicher wrote:
Unpatching the sources *before* the build process was cleaned up makes
no sense to me at
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Le 17/05/12 00:25, James McCoy a écrit :
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 04:23:05PM +0200, Olе Streicher wrote:
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?
As was
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 08:21:23AM +0200, Thibaut Paumard wrote:
Le 17/05/12 00:25, James McCoy a écrit :
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 04:23:05PM +0200, Olе Streicher wrote:
Unpatching the sources *before* the build process was cleaned up
makes no sense to me at all. Could you provide a use case
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Le 17/05/12 11:39, James McCoy a écrit :
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 08:21:23AM +0200, Thibaut Paumard wrote:
Le 17/05/12 00:25, James McCoy a écrit :
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 04:23:05PM +0200, Olе Streicher wrote:
Unpatching the sources *before* the
James McCoy vega.ja...@gmail.com writes:
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 04:23:05PM +0200, Olе Streicher wrote:
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?
As was described in #649531:
vcs clone repository
Hi,
I just discovered that debuild does not behave as I would expect from
the maintainer's guide [1]:
| Cleaning the source and rebuilding the package from your user account
| is as simple as:
| $ debuild
[...]
| You can clean the source tree as simply as:
| $ debuild clean
This gives an
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 09:05:21AM +0200, Olе Streicher wrote:
I just discovered that debuild does not behave as I would expect from
the maintainer's guide [1]:
| Cleaning the source and rebuilding the package from your user account
| is as simple as:
| $ debuild
[...]
| You can clean
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Le 16/05/12 09:34, Andrey Rahmatullin a ?crit :
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 09:05:21AM +0200, Olе Streicher wrote:
I just discovered that debuild does not behave as I would expect
from the maintainer's guide [1]:
| Cleaning the source and
On Mi, 16 Mai 2012, Thibaut Paumard wrote:
fishy with the default behaviour: anytime you have to patch a file
which is later modified during build, you have to build with -tc IIRC.
Ouch, I had this case (reautoconf vs patching), it lead me to give
up on it. It simply is not worth the pain.
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 09:05:21AM +0200, Olе Streicher wrote:
What is the rationale behind the automatic reversal of the applied
patches before a cleanup?
Quoting from the bug I meant to refer you to (#649531) when closing the
debuild bug:
On one hand, in dpkg's source format v3, the
James McCoy james...@debian.org writes:
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 09:05:21AM +0200, Olе Streicher wrote:
What is the rationale behind the automatic reversal of the applied
patches before a cleanup?
Quoting from the bug I meant to refer you to (#649531) when closing the
debuild bug:
On one
debian-de...@liska.ath.cx (Olе Streicher) writes:
Hi,
I just discovered that debuild does not behave as I would expect from
the maintainer's guide [1]:
| Cleaning the source and rebuilding the package from your user account
| is as simple as:
| $ debuild
[...]
| You can clean the
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.
Hi,
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 09:05:21AM +0200, Olе Streicher wrote:
Hi,
I just discovered that debuild does not behave as I would expect from
the maintainer's guide [1]:
You should say :-)
I just discovered that debuild does not behave as it is described in the
maintainer's guide. So the
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 04:23:05PM +0200, Olе Streicher wrote:
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?
As was described in #649531:
vcs clone repository with unpatched source
cd repo
... tweak a
22 matches
Mail list logo
