[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: gem2deb: missing debian/.gitattributes in produced packages



On Sun, Feb 16, 2020 at 11:10:37PM +0100, Daniel Leidert wrote:
> Am Sonntag, den 16.02.2020, 11:08 -0300 schrieb Antonio Terceiro:
> > Package: gem2deb
> > Version: 1.0
> > Tags: confirmed newcomer
> > 
> > (bcc: submit@b.d.o to open a bug report)
> > 
> > On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 07:16:14PM -0500, Utkarsh Gupta wrote:
> > > Hi Georg,
> > > 
> > > On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 7:10 PM Georg Faerber <georg@debian.org> wrote:
> > > > > JFTR: It is also missing debian/.gitattributes - probably for the same
> > > > > reason.
> > > > 
> > > > I just did a test: debian/salsa-ci.yml is created correctly, but
> > > > debian/.gitattributes is not. I guess the current code doesn't handle
> > > > files with a dot in the beginning, but I didn't check.
> > > 
> > > I remember we reproduced the gem2deb-not-creating-salsa-ci.yml issue
> > > on Antonio's system.
> > > And also on Samyak's (few hours ago).
> > 
> > Yes, confirmed.
> > 
> > The problem is in Gem2Deb::DhMakeRuby::Template.load_all. Instead of
> > using just `Dir.glob("**/*")` to get all templates, it needs to use
> > `Dir.glob("**/*", File::FNM_DOTMATCH)` to match files that start with a
> > dot.
> > 
> > The actual patch should be quite simple and is left as an exercise for
> > someone willing to start contributing to gem2deb (hence the newcomer
> > patch).
> 
> Georg is running version 0.45. In version 1.0.4 the files are not shipped atm
> because they don't even get into the source. See 
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-ruby/2020/02/msg00049.html

Ah! sorry I missed that part of the thread.

> If the suggested piece of code is ok with you I'd submit it.

I applied a slightly different version. see commit 88b6ab9

> Also gem2deb still has the apt-file issue making it fail on autopkgtest
> stalling the migration for some packages.

Yeah, I'm about to make an upload that should fix that.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: