Binary compatibility on Linux

[Jacob Carlborg]

On 2012-11-15 08:51, Thomas Koch wrote:

> You're right about make. However the Makefiles that one needs today for
> Debian packages are so trivial that it's not worth to worry about it. The
> most basic debian/rules (which is a Makefile) looks like:
>
>                 #!/usr/bin/make -f
>                 %:
>                         dh $@
>
> You only need to add additional targets if you want to override default
> actions. In that case you usually add simple targets with a few lines.
>
> We could switch from Makefiles to something else but it's simply not worth
> the effort.

Well, I simply don't think Makefiles are worth the effort.

> But after all you don't need to do the Debian packaging yourself. It's even
> a bit infamous if upstream is also the maintainer of the Debian package for
> different reasons. Just be a good upstream[2] and find a Debian maintainer
> who cares about your software. The same thing for Fedora.

It's not thinking about making the actual Debian package, I was more 
thinking of building the actual software.

> [2] wiki.debian.org/UpstreamGuide

I've read that page and from my understanding they prefer to use "make":

"Please don't use SCons"
"Using waf as build system is discouraged"


-- 
/Jacob Carlborg