From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Page Subject: Re: Debian packaging question Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2012 22:17:55 +0000 Message-ID: <50C90293.4060407@ubuntu.com> References: <50C6C5E5.6010107@widodh.nl> <0D99561D-3A0B-4766-9770-8A90E37B7A24@inktank.com> <50C705A9.1030603@ubuntu.com> <7A33695B-249B-4638-94BF-BC3BD283216B@inktank.com> <50C864A8.1010707@ubuntu.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from youngberry.canonical.com ([91.189.89.112]:40571 "EHLO youngberry.canonical.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755466Ab2LLWSB (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Dec 2012 17:18:01 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Sage Weil Cc: Gary Lowell , Wido den Hollander , ceph-devel -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 12/12/12 15:44, Sage Weil wrote: >>> Gah - this will bite when I do the next upload to Ubuntu as >>> well then; Can I suggest that we rework debian/rules for >>> debhelper >= 7 and use overrides rather than the current 'old >>> style' rules which define all tasks? I was toying with doing >>> this anyway (and have it working locally) - it does cut out >>> some of the content from d/rules and makes it a bit more >>> *magic* >>> >>> Thoughts? I'm happy to raise a pull request for this. > Yes, please! In the meantime, does build-indep sound like a valid > workaround? (This hiccup has been delaying some simple fixes in > 0.55.1, but unless there is a quick fix I think we'll just release > it without the java bindings for now to get those fixes out to > people.) Try this - https://github.com/javacruft/ceph/commit/eb9516b92fbf1d09376ad86bc081d927f47656c0 I've given it a quick sniff locally to check the package build process generates the arch:all packages when requested (and does not when a architecture specific build is requested). - -- James Page Ubuntu Core Developer Debian Maintainer james.page@ubuntu.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJQyQKTAAoJEL/srsug59jD0PwQAI10ecrN/GFNF6OU+3/uL7mP ieTB47CDDZZRSxnBLgPwy1Lcc8DEN1HjigWZEjyWmglQ5DWF+VLLUwU4kAKRT8Xp vPo+xbLWNl28TzlPFY7swMhPwMOV/PksAt7d6/lcmUmyoZJIojz2fjB/NY44uucg IyJn/A4jttlgm6lTaTUNrjjX6O3vuxsWu9MiGAAStVufHEaR8ILs/sGBDP30eHsf rh1YWIHdzYelupfr5ONVwqkl4RNG8wDP3g+pSOmg0aUJbGUowHkaHADR2fgWKUuL CYvl2+MSXqQv6ZqeqWl3Hvl4zqlUW9eOG50YnUguAjZefoejBP5/bBY/NgPfTeqO p1KxqCv4vZ9ZSJhXrIMLIXClgvB46LcvjnaatM6wba7EZM3fotSaL+oP3Y1gF1BO qYb3V0xtZaSVrZIVnh/nkCYz5vRuURGwAxoZGJBpsvB+hZtQc14pnlokuL6qOMFA zfDa8kz4cn9oVqJT2gYuMoP+VBwz0oVtNZmj9d02U0b0Z5oG4ZcyD0uBNUZU+AMH OpO44yA3JFcNv+7ygSNavWLRzf82sly1QN4HIhQZt476HVc79+DWzUwnWpY7UyB9 xoYTbKtZNya/SaNd5OWknmwvSof+iUbQGKvFaOo0dpyWRmde+edohzSqlMR9hn2G 9ZLKGRcFKWdl/Kslz0eq =D6vl -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----