[pacman-dev] makepkg -b is wrong

[Aaron Griffin]

On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 10:16 PM, Dan McGee <dpmcgee at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 10:07 PM, Allan McRae <mcrae_allan at hotmail.com> wrote:
>  > Karolina Lindqvist wrote:
>  >  > fredagen den 2 maj 2008 skrev Xavier:
>  >  >
>  >  >
>  >  >> I don't think they have to coexist.
>  >  >> I used -s a billion times (well, every single time makepkg complained
>  >  >> about missing deps), and I didn't use -b once. And I would think I am
>  >  >> not alone in that case.
>  >  >>
>  >  >
>  >  > I have used -b a million times. If you want to build a single package, with
>  >  > all dependencies, from source, you need it. Co-existence of -s and -b would
>  >  > make it much more useful. Actually, I used such a version when:
>  >  >
>  >  > shakti:~$ find /server/srv/ftp/archi586/ -name '*-i586.pkg.tar.gz' | wc
>  >  >    2587    2587  173147
>  >  > shakti:~$
>  >  >
>  >  > I did not build all those packages by hand, but with the help of makepkg -b
>  >  > and makeworld. Both very useful, and both custom patched.
>  >  >
>  >
>  >  This is a good point that I hadn't even considered.  I think that
>  >  porting to other architectures in itself is a perfectly valid reason for
>  >  keeping the -b flag.
>
>  I think it gives a valid reason for keeping the functionality that -b
>  provides somewhere, but I'm not convinced that it has to be in
>  makepkg.
>
>  Why couldn't anything dealing with building packages besides the one
>  asked for be dealt with elsewhere?

I agree with Dan. It seems like this could be broken out, but it also
seems like it is tied to ABS a bit. Technically, nothing says a
PKGBUILD needs to be in a dir with the same name, but -b expects that.