Re: Bug#751785: ITP: haskell-shake -- build system library, like Make, but more accurate dependencies
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 02:06:52PM -0700, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> Am Freitag, den 27.06.2014, 12:59 +0100 schrieb Colin Watson:
> > On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 01:39:39PM -0700, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> > > I worked on it a bit but got stuck with javascript file issues. Upstream
> > > added a hack that it works without the problematic viz.js, but I’m not
> > > sure if that has been released yet:
> > > https://github.com/ndmitchell/shake/issues/100
> >
> > This should all be sorted now (albeit not very gracefully;
> > debian/patches/disable-viz.patch is pretty ugly). Would you mind
> > reviewing darcs.debian.org:/darcs/pkg-haskell/haskell-shake?
>
> the problem is that patching it out is not enough. According to the
> general interpretaion, Debian must not distribute the file. So we need
> to remove it from the tarball.
I must say that I've never agreed with this interpretation; I think it's
unnecessary busywork as long as the files are legally distributable (so
no sourceless GPLed files, say). But since I'm only working on this to
unblock something else rather than because I have a personal attachment
to it, I don't really want to spend time debating it here, so sure.
> Theoretically, this would works quite nicely this way: With
>
> $ head copyright
> Format: http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
> Upstream-Name: shake
> Upstream-Contact: Neil Mitchell <ndmitchell@gmail.com>
> Source: http://hackage.haskell.org/package/shake
> # Disable viz.js; it's hard to provide source for this
> # see https://github.com/ndmitchell/shake/issues/100
> # and https://github.com/ndmitchell/shake/commit/3613e6
> Files-Excluded: html/viz.js
>
> uscan would automatically repack the original tarball to not have that
> file. Unfortunately, https://bugs.debian.org/748244 prevents that from
> working. But that just means that we don’t get tool support in creating
> the .orig.tar.gz and have to do that step manually. Therefore, I pushed
> the change.
I've pushed further changes to use cdbs's upstream tarball repackaging
code in the meantime. I'd certainly prefer to use uscan once it works.
Let me know what you think of the approach I took.
http://anonscm.debian.org/cgi-bin/darcsweb.cgi?r=pkg-haskell/haskell-shake;a=commitdiff;h=20140629165131-147b7-6342159423d7ca06488ef941e6e331c2d7090de1
> If I understand your packaging correctly, you are also not using the
> embedded jquery and flot files, right? In that case it might actually be
> easier to remove them as well (and simplify debian/copyright).
... and later you wrote:
> nevermind, I just read dh_linktree(1) and found out that it checks for
> identical files, which of course requires the files to be shipped.
It only does that check for the "deduplicate" action, not "embed".
> It is also custom to change the version to 0.13.1+dfsg1-1.
I went for just +dfsg rather than +dfsg1.
> Unrelated: How useful is the stand-alone shake tool? Is it worth having
> it in a module of its own?
To be honest I'm not really sure. I mostly just included it because it
was there; it's not needed for hoogle. Would you rather I removed it?
Thanks,
--
Colin Watson [cjwatson@debian.org]
Reply to: