Uscan enhancements revitalised (Was: let uscan exclude some upstream files)
- To: email@example.com
- Cc: Nicolas Boulenguez <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: Uscan enhancements revitalised (Was: let uscan exclude some upstream files)
- From: Andreas Tille <email@example.com>
- Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 23:19:19 +0100
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20121220221919.GB24707@an3as.eu>
- In-reply-to: <20120922203212.GA29338@pegase>
- References: <20120830214434.GD8404@an3as.eu> <20120831013853.GA7999@pegase> <20120831093815.GW28953@jones.dk> <20120904171421.GB23209@an3as.eu> <20120904231747.GA3868@pegase> <20120906203438.GC13940@an3as.eu> <20120910013530.GA22092@pegase> <20120910072640.GD16225@an3as.eu> <20120918210701.GA4770@pegase> <20120922203212.GA29338@pegase>
its a long time since the last posting in this topic - perhaps because
everybody was doing bug squashing for Wheezy but recently I needed to
rethink the status of my proposed uscan enhancements.
On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 10:32:12PM +0200, Nicolas Boulenguez wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 09:26:40AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > Would you volunteer to create a Wiki page to enable better structure
> > and which might lead to some consensus about the implementation?
> Anyone interested, feel free to review  and continue the
> discussion there.
As I see on your Wiki page you have described your proposal from your
last posting on the mailing list which is actually in contrast to
what is implemented in  and was described and discussed in the thread
starting here. I should most probably add the current implementation
to the Wiki page and I will do so in the next couple of days. But
before I'm starting to do so I would like to clarify why you used the
headline "Implementation" about the paragraph explaining what is not
implemented. That's a bit confusing but may be I missunderstood
something. Before I start mixing up things I'd like to hear your real
intention which I might have missed.
Now for the current implementation: The stumbling block I was currently
facing is that I want to strip some upstream source (of igv) from a
jar file which resides inside the packaging root as well as in a
subdirectory. It looks like
The thing is that (a) should be removed and (b) needs to remain - but
this case is not possible with the current implementation. If
Files-Excluded contains a string without '/' a "find -name" search is
approached and catches them all. I remember this behaviour was
mentioned as a design flaw but the pro-argument is that you really
comfortably can use this when doing things like
Files-Excluded: ._* *~ .DS_Store
If you would need to specify each and any dir containing such cruft
files this would become a really lousy way which is not better than
keeping the old get-orig-source way.
I / we need to think about this.
>  http://wiki.debian.org/UscanEnhancements