Re: dh_movefiles, tar vs. mv
Colin Watson <email@example.com> schrieb:
> On Fri, Feb 25, 2005 at 07:54:27PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
>> Christoph Berg <firstname.lastname@example.org> schrieb:
>> > Re: Daniel Burrows in <[🔎] email@example.com>
>> >> I'd imagine that it doesn't use mv for the same reason "install" doesn't;
>> >> ie, its purpose is to COPY files, not MOVE them.
>> > As I understood it, the question was about moving stuff from
>> > debian/tmp to debian/package. The stuff in debian/tmp should get
>> > removed by the clean target anyway, so it doesn't hurt to move instead
>> > of copying it.
>> Indeed. Especially when people tell me that dh_install is the successor
>> of dh_movefiles, which even has move in its name...
> debhelper (4.0.0) unstable; urgency=low
> * dh_movefiles has long been a sore point in debhelper. Inherited
> from debstd, its interface and implementation suck, and I have maintained
> it while never really deigning to use it. Now there is a remplacment:
> dh_install, which ...
> - copies files, doesn't move them. Closes: #75360, #82649
What do you want to say with this? Do you want to tell me that using mv
is bad? If yes, why? It's not in the bug reports.
Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich