On Friday 08 August 2003 17:17, Guillaume Rousse wrote: > Ainsi parlait Michael Scherer : > > if this is not a pure perl module, you can ignore it.is we > > or, if you really want to be clean, just split the package, in > > linuxdoc-tools and perl-Text, or something like that. > > Many perl script have part of their code into modules, but as long as > these modules are not standard, and won't be requested by other > packages, there is no need to split just to comply to a misapplied > naming policy.
That's right. The same could be applied to library, but there is the 64 bit library problem, i guess, and there is nothing like this for perl and python. The problem now is to fix the test. Having a useless warning is bad, it add noise to the output. We have 2 choices : add a exception, or change the files regexp. adding exception is not a valid solution, because having too much exceptions is a proof they are not exceptions. the test is based on the presence on files in some directory. /usr/lib/xmms => xmms naming policy is tested /usr/lib/python-* => python so, i propose to ignore the test if there is a file in some directory ( mainly bin/ or sbin/ ). WDYT ? -- Michaël Scherer
