On Fri, Mar 31, 2006 at 09:49:08PM -0500, Dave Vasilevsky wrote: > > On Mar 31, 2006, at 4:54 PM, William Scott wrote: > >Should we no longer be using "perl -pi.bak" instead of "perl - > >pi"? Some of my packages got changed back to the latter, so I am > >wondering if I should fix the rest of them.... > > It doesn't really matter usually. Just don't do "perl -pi.bak" on > files that are in %i, since that causes a .bak file to go in the deb.
I had sent an email to fink-devel about this but looks like it never got through...msachs scanned the last fink build for .deb that contained apparent backup files http://wiki.opendarwin.org/index.php/Fink:Packaging:breakage/2006-03-09/ppc#backup_files_in_.deb and I've been working on removing them when I get a chance (making sure they really are useless backups, not an important file). Within the build directory, it doesn't matter what you do regarding backup files, or how many temp files and compiler intermediates you leave. But when it comes to what goes in the install directory, no reason for random junk. OTOH, if InstallScript looks like "cp -r . %i" instead of just copying the specific files one wants, then gotta keep a clean build dir too. dan -- Daniel Macks [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.netspace.org/~dmacks ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
