Uscan enhancements revitalised (Was: let uscan exclude some upstream files)
- To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
- Cc: Nicolas Boulenguez <nicolas.boulenguez@free.fr>
- Subject: Uscan enhancements revitalised (Was: let uscan exclude some upstream files)
- From: Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu>
- 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>
Hi Nicolas,
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[2].
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 [1] 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[3] which is actually in contrast to
what is implemented in [2] and was described and discussed in the thread
starting here[4]. 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[5]) from a
jar file which resides inside the packaging root as well as in a
subdirectory. It looks like
IGVDistribution_2.1.30/goby-io-igv.jar (a)
IGVDistribution_2.1.30/lib/goby-io-igv.jar (b)
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.
Kind regards
Andreas.
> [1] http://wiki.debian.org/UscanEnhancements
[2] git://git.debian.org/git/users/tille/devscripts.git
[3] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2012/09/msg00202.html
[4] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2012/08/msg00600.html
[5] git://git.debian.org/debian-med/igv.git
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: