Bug#373807: [Pbuilder-maint] Bug#373807: one base.tzg per distribution

Loïc Minier lool at dooz.org
Sat Oct 28 15:46:05 CEST 2006


On Fri, Oct 27, 2006, martin f krafft wrote:
> >  /usr/share/doc/pbuilder/examples/pbuilder-distribution.sh is another
> >  solution.
> >  Do you agree this feature can be handled by end-user configuration?
> Certainly. I've been using
> http://svn.madduck.net/pub/bin/pbuilder/plogin, which can be
> symlinked to pexecute, pbuild, pupdate, and pclean. Those five take
> care of my pbuilder needs. To build packages, I use pbuild, or, if
> that's not available, the same sort of idea in dbuild:
> http://svn.madduck.net/pub/bin/debian/dbuild.

 Your wrappers are full or personal customizations.  I think a lot of
 people are customizing their systems like this.

 Concerning this particular config, basetgz (but basepath suffers from
 the same problems), I'm not sure it would be wise to specialize the
 default name.  The reasons against the change I see are:
 - this would make it rather hard to handle dist-upgrades of the
   contents of the pbuilder (how do we detect a change from sarge to
   etch?  should we rename the tarball after the upgrade?) or mixtures
   of various distribution (how do you name a pbuilder which is setup
   for sid + $company repository?)
 - this naming scheme is arbitrary, we could base the name on the login
   of the unix user doing "sudo pbuilder create"
 - this is easily configurable, we already found three completely
   different implementations of this config

 The reason I see in favor of the change I see is:
 - would make it easier to have out of the box support for creation and
   usage of one pbuilder per dist

 The most flexible approach remains (IMO) the current one where this is
 simply configurable.


 Out of curiosity: what's this "phoenix" shell you're using?

-- 
Loïc Minier <lool at dooz.org>




More information about the Pbuilder-maint mailing list