Re: proposed release goal: DEBIAN/md5sums for all packages
On Sat, Aug 18, 2007 at 03:13:32AM +0200, Sven Mueller wrote:
>
> He doesn't give any information _why_ this complicates packaging that
> much, while his decision imposes additional work and complexity on
> others (be it the exception in lintian and probably linda or the
> difference between "dpkg -L" and the contents of the md5sums file, which
> makes integrity checking a bit harder).
>
> IMHO, packages (.deb) should only include files which are either listed
> in conffiles or in md5sums.
>
> The hash files in aspell/ispell/wordlist packages (for example*:
> aspell-en, idutch) are neither conffiles nor in md5sums. They are said
> to be arch-dependend and if I understand the aspell-en debian/rules
> correctly, they are shipped as empty files. I don't see why they
> couldn't just be created empty by the postinst before building the hash
> tables. I especially don't see how that complicates packaging.
The aspell-autobuildhash / ispell-autobuildhash manpage says create an
empty .compat, or one with 0 in it. I guess most people just create the
empty one. This file is then used to decide if the hash file needs to be
(re-)created or not.
Reading the manpage again I see:
This
empty file will be overwritten when the real hash is created, but will
make the hash be removed at package removal without any magic being
done in the postrm and will also help to keep track about which package
owns that file.
I guess that's the "more complicated" part.
Kurt
Reply to: