On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 4:13 AM Theodore Y. Ts'o <tytso@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 08:56:25PM +0200, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote: > > On 15.07.19 14:28, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > > > > >> The rule file contains a rule for creating debian/control and > > >> other metadata - this is done similar to the 'deb-pkg' make rule, > > >> scripts/packaging/mkdebian. > > > > > > I saw a similar patch submission before, and negative feedback about it. > > > > Do you recall what negative feedback exactly ? Sorry, my memory was broken. I did not like this patch set from the beginning, but missed to express my opinion strongly. I want debian/ to be kept as a drop-in directory for packagers, without replacing the upstream debian/rules. If a check-in source file is modified in anyway, scripts/setlocalversion would set -dirty flag, which I want to avoid. > It's possible I'm not remembering some of the feedback, but the only > thing I recall was the comment I made that I'd really like this use > case: > > make O=/build/linux-build bindeb-pkg > > to not break. And as far as I can tell from the proposed patch series > (I haven't had a chance to experimentally verify it yet), I don't > think it should break anything --- I'm assuming that we will still > have a way of creating the debian/rules file in > /build/linux-build/debian/rules when doing a O= build, and that the > intdeb-pkg rule remains the same. At least, it appears to be the case > from my doing a quick look at the patches. > > > > Debian maintains its own debian/rules, and it is fine. > > > > Not for me, I don't use it - given up trying to make anything useful > > out of it. It's extremly complex, practically undebuggable and doesn't > > even work w/o lots of external preparations. > > Yeah, the official Debian debian/rules is optimized for doing a > distribution release, and in addition to the issues Enrico has raised, > last time I tried it, it was S-L-O-W since it was building a fully > generic kernel. It's not at all useable for general developer use. It is OK if the package is targeting normal users instead of kernel developers. > It sounds like what Enrico is trying to do is to enable running > "dpkg-buildpackage -us -uc -b" from the the top-level kernel package > as being easier than running "make bindeb-pkg". I suspect this might > be because his goal is to integrate individual kernel builds from > using Debian's hermetic build / chroot systems (e.g., sbuild, pbuilder)? I am OK with generating debian/rules with 'make bindeb-pkg', a shell scripts or whatever, but I dislike to commit it in upstream git tree. debian/rules is a hook for packagers to do their jobs in downstream. "We kindly committed a generic one for you" sounds weird to me. -- Best Regards Masahiro Yamada
