On 2010-11-22, at 4:25 PM, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > On 11/22/2010 4:23 PM, Anas Nashif wrote: >> On 2010-11-22, at 4:09 PM, Arjan van de Ven wrote: >> >>> On 11/22/2010 4:03 PM, Anas Nashif wrote: >>>> On 2010-11-22, at 3:50 PM, Arjan van de Ven wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 11/22/2010 3:46 PM, Alexander Kanevskiy wrote: >>>>>> On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 5:27 PM, Marko Saukko<[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I did an image with --excludedocs in the %packages section of .ks and >>>>>>> got >>>>>>> following errors. I was wondering that should these be fixed? Because >>>>>>> all >>>>>>> submit requests needs to have bug number all these should be reported as >>>>>>> separate bugs if they should be fixed? >>>>>> yes, in that particular scenario - one bug per package. >>>>>> >>>>>>> Then comes the question to which component? Some of these packages do >>>>>>> not >>>>>>> have their own component so would it be then "MeeGo OS Base / Others" >>>>>>> for >>>>>>> example? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Installing: grep ##################### [ >>>>>>> 93/612] >>>>>>> install-info: No such file or directory for /usr/share/info/grep.info.gz >>>>> \ >>>>> >>>>> frankly.. we should make install-info detect somehow the --exclude-docs >>>>> and not complain... >>>> When trying to install an info file we just need to check that it exists >>>> before we call install-info... >>> >>> well if we need to do that for each and every install-info, we could and >>> should also fold that into install-info itself... much simpler. >>> >> Yes, we just need to suppress the warning in this case I guess :) >> >> Btw, now that we are at it, those info files should really be handled >> different in meego, atm we always have them and we always need the info >> package in the base install because it is required for post scripts, i.e. >> not a direct dependency... >> >> While exclude-docs is a nice way to get rid of everything that is %doc, I >> would really like to have a clean install with less docs by default and >> without this argument. Any suggestions how to do that? One way we have been >> using with a few packages is splitting docs into -doc packages, maybe we >> just need to create a macro for that and get this automated somehow, just >> leaving the license intact and nothing else.... > > splitting off %doc is the right answer I agree. > > autospectacle does that ;) >
I was actually talking about -doc sub-packages, not adding the %doc macro... Anas _______________________________________________ MeeGo-packaging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-packaging
