Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.maint.java > #9899
| From | Ghislain Vaillant <ghisvail@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.debian.maint.java |
| Subject | Re: RFS for libimglib2-java and libparsington-java |
| Date | 2017-08-15 11:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ueGb0-7Uc-21@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | (2 earlier) <uaMyl-f4-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <udGd3-2pD-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <ueu0a-dy-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <ueutd-n0-43@gated-at.bofh.it> <uevIB-1jj-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On 14/08/17 23:03, Markus Koschany wrote: > Am 14.08.2017 um 22:45 schrieb Ghislain Vaillant: >> >> >> On 14/08/17 21:11, Markus Koschany wrote: >> >>> 2. I saw the no-doc build profile annotations in debian/control. Is that >>> something that you specifically need for libimglib2-java or is there >>> another reason? >> >> See >> https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/upgrading-checklist.html#s-4.0.0, >> section 4.9.1: >> >>> I believe it would not hurt but I am interested to know >>> more about the advantages and whether this should be used for other -doc >>> packages too. >> >> Not sure what the advantages are, but adding support for it is not >> difficult. At least compared to other packages I maintain where explicit >> guards need to be added in the rules file to support nodoc builds. > > It's quite late here in Germany and I still suffer from jet lag effects > but I believe we are talking about two different things right now. > > Policy 4.9.1 is about the nodoc option to suppress building > documentation at all. So you could basically run something like Actually, that was not the piece of documentation I wanted to refer to, the build profiles wiki article was. > DEB_BUILD_OPTION=nodoc gbp buildpackage > > and then your -doc packages won't be built at all. I don't think this is true. > However your annotations in debian/control are for bootstrapping debian > packages. [1] I believe you don't need them if you want to support > building your package without doc packages. My understanding so far: 1) DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=nodoc: doc packages are built but left mostly empty 2) DEB_BUILD_PROFILES=nodoc: doc packages are not built at all > This is a more general tool > chain issue for Java packages. At the moment I'm not sure how well it is > supported but it is certainly something we want to support. I believe what I have done only answers 2), and I agree solving 1) is more of a toolchain issue. Same comment for nocheck support. I am happy to take it out from both libimglib2-java and libparsington-java if it is an issue anyway. I find it convenient to use "nocheck nodoc" when I have got a number of builds of inter-dependent packages to run locally, but I could also live without. Or perhaps I am completely wrong. Cheers, Ghis
Back to linux.debian.maint.java | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
RFS for libimglib2-java and libparsington-java Ghislain Vaillant <ghisvail@gmail.com> - 2017-08-04 14:00 +0200
Re: RFS for libimglib2-java and libparsington-java tony mancill <tmancill@debian.org> - 2017-08-04 16:50 +0200
Re: RFS for libimglib2-java and libparsington-java Ghislain Vaillant <ghisvail@gmail.com> - 2017-08-04 17:20 +0200
Re: RFS for libimglib2-java and libparsington-java tony mancill <tmancill@debian.org> - 2017-08-12 17:10 +0200
Re: RFS for libimglib2-java and libparsington-java Ghislain Vaillant <ghisvail@gmail.com> - 2017-08-13 18:30 +0200
Re: RFS for libimglib2-java and libparsington-java Markus Koschany <apo@debian.org> - 2017-08-14 22:20 +0200
Re: RFS for libimglib2-java and libparsington-java Ghislain Vaillant <ghisvail@gmail.com> - 2017-08-14 22:50 +0200
Re: RFS for libimglib2-java and libparsington-java Markus Koschany <apo@debian.org> - 2017-08-15 00:10 +0200
Re: RFS for libimglib2-java and libparsington-java Ghislain Vaillant <ghisvail@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 11:20 +0200
Re: RFS for libimglib2-java and libparsington-java Markus Koschany <apo@debian.org> - 2017-08-16 20:50 +0200
Re: RFS for libimglib2-java and libparsington-java Ghislain Vaillant <ghisvail@gmail.com> - 2017-08-16 21:30 +0200
Re: RFS for libimglib2-java and libparsington-java Markus Koschany <apo@debian.org> - 2017-08-16 22:30 +0200
Re: RFS for libimglib2-java and libparsington-java Ghislain Vaillant <ghisvail@gmail.com> - 2017-08-18 10:30 +0200
Re: RFS for libimglib2-java and libparsington-java Markus Koschany <apo@debian.org> - 2017-08-18 15:20 +0200
csiph-web