FS#14802 - [abs] improve/fix proto-info.install
Attached to Project:
Arch Linux
Opened by Jan Spakula (bender02) - Friday, 22 May 2009, 19:36 GMT
Last edited by Jan de Groot (JGC) - Tuesday, 09 June 2009, 08:20 GMT
Opened by Jan Spakula (bender02) - Friday, 22 May 2009, 19:36 GMT
Last edited by Jan de Groot (JGC) - Tuesday, 09 June 2009, 08:20 GMT
|
Details
Description:
If a package uses the current proto-info.install for installing texinfo documentation, and a user builds this package with "options=(!docs)" in makepkg.conf, then there is an error message "scriptlet failed to execute correctly" on installing/upgrading that package. This happens because the scriptlet insists on "installing" the texinfo docs whenever /usr/bin/install-info is present, even when the particular info files were deleted by makepkg. A simple fix is to check whether the info files are actually present before running install-info on them. a "patch" for post_install(): - install-info $infodir/$file $infodir/dir 2> /dev/null + ! [ -f $infodir/$file ] || install-info $infodir/$file $infodir/dir 2> /dev/null and similarly for pre_remove() function. By the way, the check for install-info is missing a slash: - [ -x usr/bin/install-info ] || return 0 + [ -x /usr/bin/install-info ] || return 0 |
This task depends upon
Closed by Jan de Groot (JGC)
Tuesday, 09 June 2009, 08:20 GMT
Reason for closing: Won't fix
Additional comments about closing: Will become irrelevant for pacman 3.3.
Tuesday, 09 June 2009, 08:20 GMT
Reason for closing: Won't fix
Additional comments about closing: Will become irrelevant for pacman 3.3.
However, I'm not going to pretend that I understand your point of view: This is a trivial change in a .proto file, and it solves an error message that appears under not so far-fetched unreasonable circumstances: compiling any package containing texinfo documentation with !docs (this applies mainly to AUR, I understand that when recompiling something for which a working binary package is provided I'm on my own). Why not having a prototype that deals with this situation? People using this proto to create a package (that's what protos are for, isn't they?) will create a more robust package that doesn't unnecesarily spit errors when one wants to get rid of some docs (by the way, changing to !docs should be in my opinion the only thing needed to get of the docs, not some extra editing of .install files or whatever).