* Frank Küster (frank@debian.org) wrote: > Eric Dorland <eric@debian.org> schrieb: > > > * Frank Küster (frank@debian.org) wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> dh_movefiles internally uses tar to move file contents. I'm not sure why > >> it doesn't use mv, is it because mv moves the file block-by-block and > >> thus starts removing parts of the file before it is completely written, > >> and hence is less save? > >> > >> Anyway: If I am only going to move complete subdirectories from the temp > >> tree to the package trees, is it in this case safe to use mv? It's much > >> faster, and it would safe space (because dh_movefiles only removes the > >> originals after the complete tarball has been extracted). > > > > Uhh, who cares? dh_movefiles has been superseded by dh_install. > > Well, fine. But the question remains: dh_install uses cp, not mv. What > is the problem with using mv? And would it be safe to use mv if I only > move complete directories? Well one reason is sometimes (in multipackage builds) you want to have the same file in 2 different packages. Also, the less side-effects during build time the better for debugging. Eg since dh_install is idempotent I can run my install target multiple times it will work. That won't work with dh_movefiles. OTOH if you have a massively big package, dh_install would be painful, especially on some of the buildds. -- Eric Dorland <eric.dorland@mail.mcgill.ca> ICQ: #61138586, Jabber: hooty@jabber.com 1024D/16D970C6 097C 4861 9934 27A0 8E1C 2B0A 61E9 8ECF 16D9 70C6 -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.12 GCS d- s++: a-- C+++ UL+++ P++ L++ E++ W++ N+ o K- w+ O? M++ V-- PS+ PE Y+ PGP++ t++ 5++ X+ R tv++ b+++ DI+ D+ G e h! r- y+ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature