On Friday, July 31 2020, Gabriel F. T. Gomes wrote: > Hi, Sergio, > > <3 S2 <3 S2
:-D > On Thu, 30 Jul 2020, Sergio Durigan Junior wrote: >> >> So, here's the thing. We can't blindly rely on debhelper's >> filedoublearray anymore, because of the problem you guys pointed out >> above. Which means that bash-completion will probably have to have its >> own stripped-down, poor-man's version of filedoublearray. Actually, >> given the way dh_bash-completion works, it should be enough to have a >> function that tries to determine whether the file being examined is (a) >> a bash-completion script, or (b) a file-list. If (a), then the file >> itself should be installed. If (b), then we install each file listed in >> it. > > I really like this approach. It lets filedoublearray be free to do > whatever it wants, while still working for bash-completion on the file > list case. Yep, that's the idea. Avoid calling filedoublearray if we already know what we're dealing with. >> In order to hack this new function I used a little bit of what >> filedoublearray does in the beginning, and then I crafted a few regexes >> that will perform a "heuristic" to see if we catch some well-known bash >> constructions in the file. If we succeed, then just assume that the >> file is a bash-completion script and be done with it. Otherwise, it's >> (probably) a file-list. > > I like the heuristic you came up with; it should be enough to cover all > completion files I have seen so far and it is so well-documented that > it should be easy to fix if problems show up. Cool! I wasn't sure if you'd like it; it's a bit hacky ;-). But yeah, I tried to be careful with the comments because I know that there's a chance that the function might need to be expanded in order to accomodate other cases. >> As far as I have tested, everything works OK. Of course, this is a >> heuristic approach and it is possible to craft a problematic file that >> will cause an error, but it's better than what we have now, IMHO. > > +1 > > I have tested a couple of reverse-build-dependencies of > bash-completion. Most of them use file lists and the patched debhelper > script works as before when compat level is updated to 13. I also found > one package that has a proper completion snippet (pidcat), which also > works correctly with the patched debhelper script and debhelper 13. > > I haven't tested all reverse build dependencies, though. The list is > too large. Yeah, the list is large, indeed. I guess we'll find out whether this breaks something or not when it reaches unstable and starts to be used :-). >> Hopefully this will help. I'm not tagging this as "+patch" because I'd >> like to hear your opinions first. > > Now tagged. > > I'll incorporate this change to the repository, do a little more testing, > then upload to unstable. May I set git commit authorship to > "Sergio Durigan Junior <sergi...@debian.org>" ? Sure thing! Feel free to mention in the d/changelog entry as well. Thanks :-). -- Sergio GPG key ID: 237A 54B1 0287 28BF 00EF 31F4 D0EB 7628 65FC 5E36 Please send encrypted e-mail if possible https://sergiodj.net/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
