Re: Possible framework for `debmake replacement'
Hi,
>>"David" == David Engel <david@sw.ods.com> writes:
Warning> sarcasm ahead. I see. Are you in the habit of always
David> running cpp, cc1, as and ld separately when you compile? You
David> never know what gcc might try to do behind your back. :-)
Actually, gcc does produce asm files, if you ask it to. And I
have looked at assembly, when unsure about what was happening to
locks. It took me years to trust gcc, and often I run a compile on at
least two other compilers and lints before I trust things.
But then, I'm paranoid. This is not the response you expected,
So I'll desist ;-).
Michael> In other words, I suspect, they should be official parts of
Michael> dpkg---maintainers could use them with no risk of causing
Michael> problems with people doing new ports or whatever.
>> If you-all really mean dpkg, this is out of the scope of this
>> requirements process.
David> By who's decision?
Call the subject dpkg improvements if you want to talk about
that, and I'll be a polite spectator (calling it debmake replacement
confuses me, and calls for my active participation; I'm interested in
getting a movement on the debmake issue).
I'll definitely look at implementing a spec kind of thing
(could someone mail me a rpm spec file, please?) into the document
I'm building (look for a posting in a couple of days).
I apologize if me demeanor has offended people on the list,
such was not my intent.
manoj
--
Marriage is the triumph of imagination over intelligence. Second
marriage is the triumph of hope over experience.
Manoj Srivastava <url:mailto:srivasta@acm.org>
Mobile, Alabama USA <url:http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org . Trouble? e-mail to Bruce@Pixar.com
Reply to: