Niels Thykier <[email protected]> writes: > Okay, I have committed the changes for compressing index + file-info. > As a side-effect, I compressed the control-index as well > (bin-pkg-control) to keep L::Collect side simple.
Excellent. > 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? 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. 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 should separately redo license-count in the Policy package to use Lintian::Collect. That would be fairly easy to do. -- Russ Allbery ([email protected]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
