El Lunes, 25 de Septiembre de 2006 21:39, Dan Nicholson escribió: > I've been thinking about this for a while. Is there any reason why > jhalfs doesn't use the $package-url entity to find out the tarball > instead of assuming that there is a 1:1 mapping between package and > tarball? > With a small shell function (or xsl if it's easier), you > could strip out the tarball name and figure out the directory > (approximately using tar -tf $tarball | head -n1). Then you could get > rid of the ugliness in get_package_tarball_name() and get_sources(). > If you think it could be done, I'd be glad to work on it. I think this > could also be done as a make function.
The current mapping work-flow is html_page_name-->script_name-->package_name-->tarball_name-->sources_dir_name. What you are speaking about is the last three steps (package_name-->tarball_name-->sources_dir_name). If there is a way to simplifiy it I will be very happy changing the code. In this case (headers installed from the kernel sources) the issue is about html_page_name-->build_script_name-->package_name mapping, and that can't be done until know how that new "Headers Installation" page will be called. -- Manuel Canales Esparcia Usuario de LFS nº2886: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org LFS en castellano: http://www.escomposlinux.org/lfs-es http://www.lfs-es.info TLDP-ES: http://es.tldp.org -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
