[Debian-olpc-devel] 'rainbow' uploaded to mentors.debian.net

[Luke Faraone]

On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 13:58, Jonas Smedegaard <dr at jones.dk> wrote:

> That was the Python part. The makefile is still used for compiling the NSS
> library, and you need to ensure that Debian Policy §10.1 is respected.  As
> an example, upstream use -O3 for a security-related library, and without
> being an expert in the area it is my understanding that optimizations
> stronger than -O2 has a higher risk of producing wrong code on unusual
> architectures like hppa.
>

I'm not too familiar with it either. Michael: is there any particular reason
for using -O3 on normal systems?


>  The only reason I had to hand-code was because the same structures you
>> referenced didn't build a usable package when I attempted to use them. I
>> more than welcome any changes you would suggest to get these defaults to
>> work without odd hacks.
>>
>  I believe that now after you've moved the Python code to a
> policy-compliant python-* package you can drop the
> DEB_PYTHON_MODULE_PACKAGES line from the rules file and still produce the
> exact same result.
>

Removing the line caused debuild to die with:
 dh_install: python-rainbow missing files (usr/lib/python*), aborting

Once I removed usr/lib/python* from python-rainbow.install, the packages
built, but python-rainbow did not include the Python code.

I recommend dropping DH_VERBOSE (I consider that flag a debugging aid, not
> generally useful).
>

Done. I set it to 0, so that I can easily toggle it later if needed.

I recommend moving DEB_PYTHON_SYSTEM up above all cdbs inclusions (not
> strictly needed but is simpler to look at).
> I recommend moving DEB_MAKE_INSTALL_TARGET below cdbs inclusions as there
> is no benefit of declaring it early.  Also I recommend to use recursive
> expansion (drop the colon to use "=" instead of ":=" - the latter is
> harmless in this particular instance but also unneeded).
> I suggest avoiding indented comments, as they are printed at build time
> whereas they (usually, and indeed here) are most relevant when _editing_ the
> rules file.
>

Done.

You still haven't fixed DEB_INSTALL_MANPAGES_myapp (there is no package
> "myapp" so the variable is simply ignored). Also I recommend declaring it
> above rules (but below cdbs inclusions) just for the nice structure of it.
>

Removed it entirely, the manpages were going in the right place anyway.

Thanks,
Luke Faraone
http://luke.faraone.cc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debian-olpc-devel/attachments/20091117/71e642da/attachment-0001.htm>