From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dario Faggioli Subject: Re: [PATCH] tools: Improve make deb Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 16:02:33 +0200 Message-ID: <1335276153.9483.8.camel@Abyss> References: <4F954422.1010803@tiscali.it> <1335273732.4347.130.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0737018945102795528==" Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: George Dunlap Cc: xen-devel , Ian Campbell , "fantonifabio@tiscali.it" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org --===============0737018945102795528== Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-gUp/7W2goHgPn3aI5Baw" --=-gUp/7W2goHgPn3aI5Baw Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 2012-04-24 at 14:46 +0100, George Dunlap wrote:=20 > On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 2:22 PM, Ian Campbell w= rote: > > I'm just concerned that with these patches you may be trying to turn > > this simple convenience functionality into something which you think is > > suitable for end user consumption, which is something we need to think > > carefully about since there is a maintenance (and expectation) burden > > imposed by doing that. >=20 > I think in an ideal world, "make deb" (or "make rpm") would be used by > exactly the same people who at the moment do "make install" -- that > is, fairly technical end-users who have the knowledge to muck about > with their system; they need to take the responsibility to not shoot > themselves in the foot (or to bandage it up properly if they do). > I see and share Ian's feelings, but I agree with George. :-P For what it counts, I happen to use kernel-package (make-kpkg) on Debian systems to build my kernel because it's nice and easy tool to have package(s) for my very own system. Trying putting it the other way around, let's say I'd be sad if make-kpkg weren't there, although I _never_ever_ wanted to distribute to any kind of users the packages I produced with it. Does this look close enough to this situation here? (If no, sorry for the interference :-( ). > I think it's fairly likely that this will be the case, as long as we set > the expectations properly in the documentation and so on. >=20 Agreed again. Dario --=20 <> (Raistlin Majere) ----------------------------------------------------------------- Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://retis.sssup.it/people/faggioli Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK) --=-gUp/7W2goHgPn3aI5Baw Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAk+WsnkACgkQk4XaBE3IOsTHGgCeL7p10RLyHoBROpITK0WRsso1 xVcAnA4CqKus7xMKpXhp0GIbD9+kgb1C =fZ4N -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-gUp/7W2goHgPn3aI5Baw-- --===============0737018945102795528== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel --===============0737018945102795528==--