Re: [PATCH/RFC] dpkg-shlibdeps: ignore shell scripts
Hi,
On Wed, 21 Apr 2010, Joey Hess wrote:
> At the expense of wasting time running file on everything to determine
> which are binaries, which has been marked "TODO:slow" in the source
> forever.
[...]
> And too, the more effort that needs to be spent to make dh_shlibdeps be
> able to drive dpkg-shlibdeps, the harder it is for anyone to make a
> credible alternative to it. Oh, oops, I'm supposed to consider that an
> advantage, right? :-P
Ok, we can surely expand the dpkg-shlibdeps interface without changing
the current behaviour... see suggestion below.
On Wed, 21 Apr 2010, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> 1. dpkg-shlibdeps currently supports non-ELF files as long as objdump
> does. Of course all Debian architectures use ELF by default, but
> there are users for dpkg outside of Debian (fink on Mac OS X, for
> example). Can we assume that all users of dpkg-shlibdeps use ELF
> objects exclusively?
I would not assume that it works for non-ELF currently. I have no idea
what the objdump output looks like on those systems and wether dpkg-dev
parses everything right there.
> If we can, dpkg-shlibdeps could be simplified a lot by using readelf
> instead of objdump. That’s something I would enjoy doing.
In what way do you expect simplifications ?
> 2. dpkg-shlibdeps currently complains if you pass it some random
> garbage. Maybe it would be nice to have a separate accept-anything
> mode so you can throw your entire debian/tmp at it. That’s not my
> itch.
But we could implement this easily. Change dpkg-shlibdeps to accept
directories and not only binaries and assume that when a directory is
passed you want dpkg-shlibdeps to scan all files for binaries according
to its own logic (which would be is_elf() right now but it could be
expanded later to support Mac OS X if needed).
I would accept a patch for this.
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog
Like what I do? Sponsor me: http://ouaza.com/wp/2010/01/05/5-years-of-freexian/
My Debian goals: http://ouaza.com/wp/2010/01/09/debian-related-goals-for-2010/
Reply to: