Re: build paths found in binary packages/was: Re: Getting *really* close to releasing my first .deb's... What's next?
On Tue, Apr 25, 2006 at 09:15:15PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Justin Pryzby <justinpryzby@users.sourceforge.net> writes:
>
> > I have often wondered if it would be useful to have a check (say, in
> > lintian ...) grepping the binary package contents for the build
> > directory ... assuming that the build directory is a sufficiently long
> > string, perhaps larger binary packages will need longer build paths, but
> > this doesn't seem like a real problem; /buildd/ itself is long enough to
> > make a random occurance in an enourmous package beyond unlikely.
>
> > I suspect the only think preventing this from being implemented is that
> > too many things would be affected ..
>
> All debugging information, for instance, I believe embeds the name of the
> build directory.
It certainly seems to .. good point. But this shouldn't be the reason
not to implement the check, since normal packages shouldn't have debug
info; only those matching m/-dbg$/ (or whatever) should.
Justin
Reply to: