[Pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers] r283 - tools/ruby-pkg-tools/trunk/1/class

[Esteban Manchado Velázquez]

Hello:

On Tue, Jan 17, 2006 at 12:10:26AM +0000, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Author: lucas-guest
> Date: 2006-01-17 00:10:25 +0000 (Tue, 17 Jan 2006)
> New Revision: 283
> 
> Modified:
>    tools/ruby-pkg-tools/trunk/1/class/ruby-setup-rb.mk
> Log:
> Ignore missing setup.rb files.
> 
> Some packages don't have setup.rb files (instead, they have extconf.rb, or
> worse, nothing). If a package doesn't have any setup.rb, this class doesn't
> crash anymore. I'm not sure this is the right way to handle this: maybe the
> dh_rdoc stuff should be moved outside of this class so it could be used by
> packages without setup.rb

    Hmmm.... the CDBS class is supposed to support setup.rb projects. I guess
it could work with extconf.rb or install.rb or whatever, but it's not supposed
to support just about _any_ Ruby project. If it doesn't have any setup.rb,
just add it, there's no problem with that (and, in fact, it's the recommended
solution for older setup.rb breakage).

    I'm not sure I like the idea of changing all the class just to support a
strange case (specially, being, I think, as easy to fix as adding a setup.rb
file to the distribution).

    And, perhaps more importantly, why exactly do you want to use CDBS to call
dh_rdoc? I mean, isn't it easier just to call dh_rdoc by hand? The CDBS class
doesn't do that much, you know :-) Thoughts?

    Regards,

-- 
Esteban Manchado Velázquez <zoso at debian.org>
EuropeSwPatentFree - http://EuropeSwPatentFree.hispalinux.es
Help spread it through the Net in signatures, webpages, whatever!
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers/attachments/20060117/55c05a50/attachment.pgp