On Mon, 2015-06-01 at 15:34 +0200, Lukas Fleischer wrote: > On Mon, 01 Jun 2015 at 15:09:43, Gordian Edenhofer wrote: > > > > [...] > > > > This kind of check would see files which are named e.g. lp:foo > > > > as > > > > not > > > > missing even if they are. > > > > > > Sure, we only check local files and lp:foo is a remote file. > > > Checking > > > remote sources is something that we cannot do properly. > > > > I did not suggest checking remote sources. > > My question was why excluding the check for files with "lp:" in > > their > > name. lp:whatever is a valid name for a local file, why should I > > expect > > them to be remote? > > "lp:whatever" is not a valid name for a local file in makepkg(8). In > order to avoid confusion with Bazaar/Launchpad URIs, everything that > contains "lp:" is considered a remote file. You can check the makepkg > source code to convince yourself that it uses the same method for > distinguishing between local and remote files. > > [1] https://projects.archlinux.org/pacman.git/tree/scripts/libmakepkg > /util/source.sh.in#n40
Thank you very much for the explanation! I was not aware of that.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
