As a followup question, I have noticed that a lot of packages (including electrum, which I have recently started maintaining) ship the egg-info directory. Looking through /usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/, this is common but not universal. Is there any reason to ship this directory or should it be removed from the binary packages?
Also, the commit linked to below states:
"if the egg-info directory is included in the upstream source, then
deleting it causes no harm as dpkg-source warns on missing files in
the source package but does not exit with error.”
It might not cause any problems for dpkg-source, but won’t it cause issues for double builds? For reference:
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1044268
If so, any package that ships the egg-info directory in the tarball will get flagged with a FTBFS bug, which might be the desired behavior if these shouldn’t be in the tarball anyway.
On Wednesday, September 6, 2023 5:52:18 AM MST Jeremy Stanley wrote:
> On 2023-09-05 14:16:55 +0200 (+0200), Thomas Goirand wrote:
> [...]
>
> > Yes, we can have dh-python to do the work, but IMO, the only thing
> > it should be doing, is rm -rf *.egg-info, and error out if the
> > egg-info is within the orig tarball, as this should not happen,
> > IMO.
>
> [...]
>
> See
> https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/tools/dh-python/-/commit/31eff8f
> which merged last week.
--
Soren Stoutner
soren@stoutner.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.