Bug#789581: marked as pending

[James McCoy]

On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 05:41:21AM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> On Wed, 2016-11-23 at 18:11:37 +0000, James McCoy wrote:
> > commit 607c5911b44ca61cf352e80397b5707ee23d9eec
> > Merge: 1f82d5b 064dc31
> > Author: James McCoy <jamessan at debian.org>
> > Date:   Wed Nov 23 12:53:49 2016 -0500
> > 
> >     Merge branch 'debuild-slimming'
> >     
> >     Refactor debuild to be a much thinner wrapper around dpkg-buildpackage.
> >     There is no longer any emulation of dpkg-buildpackage, and unknown
> >     options will be passed through to dpkg-buildpackage.
> 
> Wow, great! Thanks for this.
> 
> It seems that in commit 6bf94e623894dc2b7da41f6a45d9b4368d250ce2
> there's a swapped hook name and it should be:
> 
>   'final-clean' => 'postclean',
> 
> ?

Indeed.  Thanks for spotting that.

> Also checking what's missing, I guess I could add a new --sign-option,
> in which case iff when passed, I could make --sign-command receive just
> the file to sign, so that you could pass debsign/debrsign? I think that
> would allow eliminating another good chunk of code?

That should work, yes.  Another thing to think about is allowing
--check-command to be specified multiple times, and therefore have
--check-command/--check-option be positional.  This would allow running
multiple checkers (e.g., --check-command=lintian --check-option=-i
--check-command=piuparts --check-option=--distribution=testing
--check-option=--distribution=sid).

> Also probably we should move the Ubuntu checks into a new hook in
> Dpkg::Vendor::Ubuntu?

You're referring to the changes file checks?  That'd be useful.

> Should DPKG_.* environment variables also be preserved?

Which ones?  dpkg-buildpackage(1) refers to a few DEB_* variables, which
are already preserved.  I should probably add SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH anyway,
so the only other one is DPKG_COLORS which isn't relevant until #679645
is addressed.

Cheers,
-- 
James
GPG Key: 4096R/91BF BF4D 6956 BD5D F7B7  2D23 DFE6 91AE 331B A3DB