On 10/28/19 9:29 AM, Daan van Rossum wrote: > * on Monday, 2019-10-28 23:08 +1000, Allan McRae <[email protected]> wrote: >>> I imagine there may be exceptional situations where the extra power will >>> be nice to have in the future. >> >> Do you have a plausible example where a list of symlinks is not enough? > > # pacman -Fl lua lua52 | grep include > lua usr/include/ > lua usr/include/lauxlib.h > lua usr/include/lua.h > lua usr/include/lua.hpp > lua usr/include/luaconf.h > lua usr/include/lualib.h > lua52 usr/include/ > lua52 usr/include/lua5.2/ > lua52 usr/include/lua5.2/lauxlib.h > lua52 usr/include/lua5.2/lua.h > lua52 usr/include/lua5.2/lua.hpp > lua52 usr/include/lua5.2/luaconf.h > lua52 usr/include/lua5.2/lualib.h > > Each of the lua header files lives in /usr/include. A function can symlink > all files in a directory using wildcards. Would you not need at least some > form of wildcard support in a list of key-value pairs?
I'd argue it is incorrectly packaged, then. They should live in /usr/include/lua/ which would be a directory symlink. I'm admittedly not sure how to maintain the ability to include from /usr/include without additional symlinks that have no package to be packaged in... But if we needed wildcard support for only a subset of files in that directory, then we could use bash wildcards to generate a bunch of different alternatives, and link them together as a single group. This is already something we want, because we want to change the symlink for /usr/bin/lua at the same time anyway. -- Eli Schwartz Bug Wrangler and Trusted User
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
