Hi, Am Donnerstag, den 20.03.2014, 08:02 +0100 schrieb Andreas Tille: > On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 12:14:37AM +0100, Joachim Breitner wrote: > > Am Mittwoch, den 19.03.2014, 23:04 +0100 schrieb Andreas Tille: > > > I'm testing the current status of uscan in devtools Git and noticed the > > > following when trying to update cimg-dev and mothur ... both coming as > > > zip archives: > > > > thanks. Added as a test case and fixed. > > Did you also pushed this change?
sorry, didn’t... done. > > I noticed that with my changes, it did not remove the Excluded-File > > file, because html/img/project-support.jpg does not match the full file > > name. Is there a precise specification about how entries should match? > > Anywhere in the file; the end of the file, the full file or the full > > file excluding the first directory? > > When I proposed my first implementation the Files-Excluded was relative > to the unpackaging dir and html/img/project-support.jpg. Yesterday I > learned (with some non-zip archive) that the implementation has changed > to the root of the tar archive and thus now the correct way to specify > the exclusion would be: > > Files-Excluded: */html/img/project-support.jpg > > I simply assumed that the devscripts developers have good reasons for > this change and I do not mind much (except that I need to remember to > change some d/copyright files accordingly). No, that was just me, based on what the testcases did (I like implementing along testcases) and later realized that it is not what others do. > In any case if this change was intentionally we should probably fix the > specification at > > https://wiki.debian.org/UscanEnhancements > > as well. Ok, if that is the specification, I can adjust the implementation to match the specification, which also dictates that * should match / and . as well. > > I’m having some trouble getting the Text::Glob to do what I want, > > especially with the Excluding-file-from-zip-without---repack that I was > > asked to put back in (do we really need that? Who uses uscan to download > > zip files without repacking them to tar), > > I guess there is no point in keeping zip files at all and changing them > to tar ... and by default to tar.xz if you ask me. So do we need to support zip-to-zip File-Exclusion? Or can we expect the user do say “--repack” and (which creates the tar file) and only support tar-to-tar File-Exclusion? Then I can revert c5ac9056f396ce0009b9f8bcd628852e5a74eaa0 and d48ce79e5e76da7f86b36245cf91d2f97c710879. Greetings, Joachim -- Joachim "nomeata" Breitner Debian Developer [email protected] | ICQ# 74513189 | GPG-Keyid: 4743206C JID: [email protected] | http://people.debian.org/~nomeata
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ devscripts-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devscripts-devel
