Roger Leigh <rle...@codelibre.net> writes: > On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 07:09:44PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: >> > Output at http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/build-rule-check.bz2 >> > I haven't had time to analyse this, if someone else wants to, >> > that would be cool. >> > >> > Done on lintian.debian.org using the following: >> > >> > #!/bin/sh >> > >> > cd /srv/lintian.debian.org/laboratory/source >> > find . -type f -name rules | grep 'debfiles/rules$' | while read rule >> > do >> > egrep -H '^(build(.*%)?|build-(arch|indep)):' "$rule" >> > done >> > >> > >> > Regards, >> > Roger >> >> Now why does it only list 8k sources if it matches the required >> "build:" target? Are 50% of all sources already dropping through that >> grep because they use dh ('%:') or include files? > > That's what I think, and a cursory look at a few gives the same > impression. Which is surprisingly good--there's only a single > tool to update to get support added for a huge chunk of the > archive (well, there's cdbs as well of course, so it's two main > ones).
I would think dh already supports them. So we might actuay have >50% coverage of binay-arch/indep already or verry close to it. Maybe we can actualy change policy post squeeze because the majority of sources supports it. >> Anyway, grepping for sources that (probably) have build-arch/indep: >> >> % bzcat build-rule-check.bz2 | egrep >> '/rules:(build(.*%)+|build-(arch|indep)):' | cut -d":" -f1 | sort -u | wc -l >> 572 >> >> Lots of work to do. > > Agreed! But, should be an achievable goal for squeeze+1 if we start > on it early. > > Regards, > Roger Totaly. MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87r5edibvo....@frosties.localnet