Re: Bug#664794: lintian: should we compress some collections (file-info and index)?
Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net> writes:
> Okay, I have committed the changes for compressing index + file-info.
> As a side-effect, I compressed the control-index as well
> (bin-pkg-control) to keep L::Collect side simple.
Excellent.
> I had a look at some other candidates and I am thinking that java-info,
> copyright-file and md5sums. However, as it is we sometimes just leave
> an empty file for these collections (if there is no information etc.).
> For copyright-file and java-info this is probably going to be common
> case (symlinked u/s/d/$pkg and no jar files respectively).
> My personal view is that we could do without the empty files and then
> only leave a file if there is any information. It will probably require
> some changes to checks (or collections) that access these directly, but
> I think we should take that as an oppertunity of improving (the usage
> of) L::Collect. :)
Is it maybe time to start installing our Perl modules in the Perl search
path? We'd probably need to add a BEGIN block to the lintian frontend to
search the command-line options for --root and insert a "use lib"
statement if one was found to be sure we get the new modules, but I think
that should be sufficient. And then any out-of-tree stuff that wants to
parse the lab can start using a documented API for doing so, with the
understanding that it's still in flux and could change further.
I should separately redo license-count in the Policy package to use
Lintian::Collect. That would be fairly easy to do.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: