[Build-common-hackers] Bug#625448: Bug#625448: Bug#625448: cdbs: Do not remove copyright_newhints if it contains new information
dr at jones.dk
Tue May 3 18:10:11 UTC 2011
On 11-05-03 at 05:12pm, Olivier Aubert wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-05-03 at 17:02 +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > On 11-05-03 at 02:35pm, Olivier Aubert wrote:
> > > When new copyright information is detected by licensecheck, the
> > > displayed procedure advises to compare/replace copyright_hints
> > > with copyright_newhints. However, if COPYRIGHT_CHECK_STRICT is not
> > > set, the copyright_newhints is removed in all cases, which makes
> > > the file unavailable for further processing.
> > > The proposed patch removes the copyright_newhints only if there is
> > > no further processing to do.
> > CDBS previously behaved like your patch proposes, but was changed as
> > the "clean" target must properly clean - i.e. not leave behind any
> > noise.
> Then why not simply
> rm debian/copyright_newhints
> in the clean target?
Hmm - that sounds more elegant indeed.
> > So i doubt the patch is really sensible. Or that this really is a
> > problem, other than one of improving documentation.
> The problem is that for the moment, the message is misleading: a
> message indicating "Fully compare debian/copyright_hints with
> debian/copyright_newhints and replace debian/copyright_hints with
> debian/copyright_newhints" is displayed, and the copyright_newhints
> file does not exist. I first had to search for it in other
> directories, run the licensecheck from sources (hence #625442) to make
> sure it worked, and finally had to look at the utils.mk source to
> figure out that the indicated file was indeed removed just after the
> message is displayed.
Thanks for elaborating!
> > How about simply extend the emitted instructions with setting
> > COPYRIGHT_CHECK_STRICT=1 and rerunning the pre-build rule?
> From my very superficial knowledge of the code, I think it is a bit
> convoluted, and removing the file in the clean: target would seem more
> But I may be missing something, and anyway, the main issue is: do not
> display a message about the copyright_newhints file if it is removed
> just after the message is displayed. Either change the message, or
> preserve the file.
Honestly I do not recall if there is a good reason for current logic.
I'll let this hang a bit to see if I remember, or else I probably
restructure as you suggest. Thanks!
* Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
* Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/
[x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
More information about the Build-common-hackers