Interface to dpkg-buildpackage inconsistent and not well documented

[Scott Kitterman]

Binary package hint: bzr-builddeb

While attempting to do a merge, I went astray because I (incorrectly) inferred from the fact that the -S flag builds a source package only, other dpkg-buildpackage options would work too. For merges, -v (from dpkg-buildpackage) is always required, but (as I now know) -S -v means something completely different. I learned from asking (this does not appear to be in the bzr help) that there is a -- switch to pass additional options.

Having some dpkg-buildpackage options be directly accessible and some that have to be accessed via a switch is inconsistent and (for me) confusing. Ideally, much like debuild, this script would wrap the standard options normally used to build packages. Of course at this point, that would require existing options to change their meaning, so it might be better just to do bzr builddep [bzr builddeb options] -- [dpkg-buildpakcage options] so the interface is at least consistent.

ProblemType: Bug
Architecture: i386
Date: Tue Dec 22 22:38:27 2009
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 9.10
Package: bzr-builddeb 2.2~ubuntu3
PackageArchitecture: all
ProcEnviron:
 LANGUAGE=
 LANG=en_US.UTF-8
 SHELL=/bin/bash
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 2.6.31-16.53-generic
SourcePackage: bzr-builddeb
Uname: Linux 2.6.31-16-generic i686

[Barry Warsaw (barry)]

I will document this in my sphinx doc branch

[Scott Kitterman (kitterman)]

If possible I'd prefer an improved interface to better documentation of the existing warts.

[Barry Warsaw (barry)]

Agreed that fixing the warts is the long-term goal.

[James Westby (james-w)]

Is it possible to request bzr to not choke on unknown options and just
pass them through as a list?

That would be a quicker way to solve this, but I don't like the
interface that would provide. I think we are stuck with just adding all
the arcane options to bzr-builddeb.

Thanks,

James

[John A Meinel (jameinel)]

the bzr infrastructure doesn't have a way to pass them down. Other than using '-- -f -b -x' and treating them all as non Option arguments

Depends which is more tasteful. Explicitly listing them, or using -- to denote them as being directly passed down.

[Scott Kitterman (kitterman)]

Currently to pass the equivalent of dpkg-buildpackakge -S -sa -us -uc one
would use -S -- -sa -us -uc. This could stand being de-uglified. I think
"You are talking to bzr-builddeb before the -- and dpkg-buildpackage after"
would at least be more consistent. Personally, I think the reverse makes more
sense, but if bzr won't support it, then it won't.

[James Westby (james-w)]

On Wed, 26 Jan 2011 23:25:06 -0000, Scott Kitterman <email address hidden> wrote:
> Currently to pass the equivalent of dpkg-buildpackakge -S -sa -us -uc one
> would use -S -- -sa -us -uc.

Just to be clear, you are actually free to spell this

  bzr bd -- -S -sa -us -uc

if you like.

Thanks,

James

[Scott Kitterman (kitterman)]

On Wednesday, January 26, 2011 07:26:41 pm you wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Jan 2011 23:25:06 -0000, Scott Kitterman <email address hidden>
wrote:
> > Currently to pass the equivalent of dpkg-buildpackakge -S -sa -us -uc one
> > would use -S -- -sa -us -uc.
>
> Just to be clear, you are actually free to spell this
>
> bzr bd -- -S -sa -us -uc
>
That's good to know. Perhaps given the limitations of bzr, this can mostly be
addressed in documentation as I recall having a very hard time figuring out
how to pass options other than -S to dpkg-buildpackage through bzr bd.