Hi Riku, 2017-04-20 19:53 GMT+09:00 Riku Voipio <riku.voipio@xxxxxxxxxx>: > Hi, > > Thanks for taking time to review. > > On 18 April 2017 at 17:31, Masahiro Yamada > <yamada.masahiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Before expanding this even more, >> please help me understand this script. >> >> Commit 3716001b implemented source package build >> at the end of the builddeb script. >> However, the binary packages are still built in its own way. >> (So, debian/rules is not used in general workflows, >> so we need to test it explicitly somehow.) > > Historic reasons.. since the builddeb already existed, the easiest way > to implement debian/rules was to make a skeleton debian/rules that > calls builddeb indrectly. > >> Why do not we create a source package first, >> then build binary packages from it? > > I wouldn't do a source package per se, but we could create a debian/ > directory tree and the call dpkg-buildpackage. This would be a more > substantial overhaul that might break some expected behavior of > deb-pkg targets. If people think its worth, I can give it a shot. In hindsight, it seems more straightforward to me to build the binary packages from the source package. But, I know this refactoring will need lots of changes, which may break something. Once we support this fastdeb-pkg target, we will not be able to convert the script in that way. (because we do not have a standard way to generate a particular binary package from *.dsc) That's why I asked the question, and I want to be careful. >> rpm-pkg does that way. >> (generate a spec-file, then run rpmbuild) > > speaking of the mkspec script, it would be nice to refactor it to here > documents over endless lines of echo. As always, cleaning patches are welcome. -- Best Regards Masahiro Yamada -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kbuild" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
