[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Enabling uupdate to simply remove files from upstream source (Was: Minified javascript files)



On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 11:55:02AM +0200, Daniel Leidert wrote:
> Andreas Tille wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 09:39:05AM +0200, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> > > Part of the problem is that we lack good tools to do this extra work
> > > for us. 
> > 
> > As an unrelated idea which popped up when reading this:  Do you think it
> > would be a sensible enhancement to uupdate if it could deal with a list
> > of files (wildcard strings that could be feed to `rm -rf`) which should
> > be removed from the upstream tarball?  This could simplify repackaging
> > to a certain amount.
> 
> I use a script for this:
> 
> http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/debichem/unstable/openbabel/debian/watch?view=markup
> http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/debichem/unstable/openbabel/debian/get-orig-source.sh?view=markup
> 
> There are several other examples in this tree. It is pretty simple. Just
> replace line 20 in get-orig-source.sh with whatever you want to do here.
> FYI: I don't make use of uupdate. I don't need it in my setup.

I'm using a more sophisticated script, that allows to filter at the same
time as the file is downloaded, without actually extracting to disk.
http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-mozilla/iceweasel.git;a=blob;f=debian/repack.py;h=a797d5471f20e0f8de155d483e5ad2f1b2c3bdc5;hb=c1ebf8be93add288837377e4fdd87f9c9f1082cc

This can seem a worthless optimization, but when your source tarball is
more than 80MB bzipped, it makes a huge difference (especially when
downloading is rather slow, in which case the whole process is about as
fast as downloading alone)

It supports wildcards, and extra filters (sed-like). See, for example,
the filter used on iceweasel source:
http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-mozilla/iceweasel.git;a=blob;f=debian/source.filter;h=ec7efac7b97add1f39480c07fecb4b70ae7a7ec8;hb=c1ebf8be93add288837377e4fdd87f9c9f1082cc

Mike


Reply to: