On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 17:03:10 -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > > This is unnecessary duplication, error-prone[0] and makes things harder > > if we ever choose to change the directory layout[1]. > Yeah, that's a valid point. Agreed. > > If the problem is a backward-compatible way of handling the removal of > > these empty dirs, maybe something like this? > > > > find $(TMP) -depth -type d -empty -print0 | \ > > xargs -0r rmdir -p --ignore-fail-on-non-empty > That would work. Agreed. /me sighs gently because he has changed some of these lines to explicit rmdir's in the past ... > What does the rest of the group think? We should update dh-make-perl to > do whatever is the best solution here Right. But that's the easy part. > and should probably decide before we > start changing more packages than we have already. Ack, we should find a solution (that works both for perl 5.8 and 5.10) and then implement it for all packages ... BTW: Is there a timetable for the introduction of perl 5.10 in unstable? Cheers, gregor -- .''`. http://info.comodo.priv.at/ | gpg key ID: 0x00F3CFE4 : :' : debian: the universal operating system - http://www.debian.org/ `. `' member of https://www.vibe.at/ | how to reply: http://got.to/quote/ `- NP: Element of Crime: You
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature