please upload: pd-pdogg

[Hans-Christoph Steiner]

On Apr 24, 2011, at 9:16 AM, Felipe Sateler wrote:

> On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 13:02, IOhannes m zmoelnig <zmoelnig at iem.at>  
> wrote:
>>>
>>> I see that some bugs (buils system, mostly) will require uploading  
>>> all
>>> (or most) of the pd externals. Can we do something to avoid that?
>>>
>> hmm, i'm not sure if i understand what you mean:
>> i thought bugs can only be fixed by providing fixed versions.
>> if a package is FTBFS because of  broken bulid system, then the  
>> only solution i
>> see is to fix the build system and re-upload the package.
>>
>> the only alternative i see, would be to centralize the build  
>> system, e.g. by
>> providing a common makefile snippet that would be used instead of  
>> upstream's
>> build system.
>>
>> i started centralizing once with a "pd-pkg-tools" library, but it  
>> ended up as a
>> cdbs snippet (while almost all of the packages in question right  
>> now use
>> shortform dh).
>> also the cdbs snippet does not replace upstream build system, but  
>> rather fixes
>> debian specifics (e.g. make shlibdeps work nicely with the non- 
>> standard
>> extension)
>>
>> i'm not opposed at all to using a central (separately maintained)  
>> makefile, but
>> hans has spent a lot of time crafting the current (upstream)  
>> makefile to make it
>> work with a wide range of systems.
>> the current template for the (upstream) Makefile already fixes the  
>> kFreeBSD/hurd
>> problems, but the packages in question have not been updated  
>> (upstream) to use
>> the new template, so i decided to fix the problem using packaging  
>> possibilities.
>
>
> This is the key part: for most pd externals, the makefile is
> essentially the same. Does it make sense to centralize that? What do
> others think?


I'd like to keep the short-form dh packages that I've done as they  
are, using this same Makefile.  I've spent a lot of time building up a  
whole workflow to fit well into dh style, which is the dominant system  
of Debian-NYC which I'm part of, and the upstream workflow.  Its great  
that there is also CDBS stuff, but for the stuff I maintain, I don't  
want to switch.

.hc


----------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem.