On 2012-03-25 21:17, Russ Allbery wrote: > Niels Thykier <[email protected]> writes: > > [...] >> I had a look at some other candidates and I am thinking that java-info, >> copyright-file and md5sums. However, as it is we sometimes just leave >> an empty file for these collections (if there is no information etc.). >> For copyright-file and java-info this is probably going to be common >> case (symlinked u/s/d/$pkg and no jar files respectively). > >> My personal view is that we could do without the empty files and then >> only leave a file if there is any information. It will probably require >> some changes to checks (or collections) that access these directly, but >> I think we should take that as an oppertunity of improving (the usage >> of) L::Collect. :) > > Is it maybe time to start installing our Perl modules in the Perl search > path?
Personally, this has been one of the things I have been wanting for a while[0], so generally I approve of that suggestion. :) > We'd probably need to add a BEGIN block to the lintian frontend to > search the command-line options for --root and insert a "use lib" > statement if one was found to be sure we get the new modules, but I think > that should be sufficient. Actually, I do not see why the frontends would need change (a lot). Also, I assume we are not going to install checks in the perl search path, so we would still need to update @INC (in lintian). > And then any out-of-tree stuff that wants to > parse the lab can start using a documented API for doing so, with the > understanding that it's still in flux and could change further. > I would probably want to see index() return objects first and solve "index vs $colls"[1] first. I especially suspect that the latter will cause some people issues. Revisiting the issue (after todays commits), I am inclined to just remove the extra layer of quoting when reading index files in L::Collect. It would save us some duplicated "strip quoting". If the stripped quoting is (or had been) an issue we already have an issue as chekcs/binaries (and others) use the filenames from (sorted_)file_info rather than the "quoted" (sorted_)index. > I should separately redo license-count in the Policy package to use > Lintian::Collect. That would be fairly easy to do. > Except L::Collect does not cover the copyright-file yet. :) But once it does, you can throw in a Lintian::Lab::visit_packages and license-count will be lab (layout) agnostic as well! :P ~Niels [0] You may remember http://lists.debian.org/debian-lint-maint/2011/07/msg00044.html [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-lint-maint/2011/08/msg00291.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
