-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Mike McCallister wrote: > Package: svn-buildpackage > Version: 0.6.16etch1 > Severity: normal > > > I normally keep some unversioned files in my working copy that I use > during development but do not want distributed as part of the source > .tar.gz. In order to avoid having these files clutter my "svn status" > output, I use the svn:ignore property on the directory to exclude them > by name and by pattern (e.g., ignore "testfile" and "testfile-*.gz"). > This causes svn status to be quiet about the listed files/patterns > (meaning, it does not list them as "?" status files).
Yes, good point. > The 0.6.16etch1 version of svn-buildpackage includes unversioned files > that are listed in the svn:ignore property in the built .tar.gz file. > > Based on my reading of > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=414547;msg=51, this > is a bug. It seems like svn-buildpackage's behavior should be I agree, this is a bug. > functionally equivalent to that of "svn export". "svn export" skips > files that unversioned, whether they are listed in the svn:ignore > property or not. Indeed, that is correct. > The same files are excluded from the built .tar.gz file if they are > not listed in the svn:ignore property, which is the behavior I would > expect. This is a suitable workaround for now, although it makes my > svn status output cluttered and unpleasant to look at. I think that all this dance of hardlinks, cp -a, making lists and all that tends to be a "perfect" solution... and perfect is the opposite of good. I propose to just use svn export instead of all this... The only disadvantages I see are: - - more disk space is used for the build - - if the source is changed during the build, that won't be visible at the end of the build, thus preventing from an early stage the detection of weird build systems/autochanging files ... Another option would be to use "svn status --verbose" whose output would need to be parsed to fetch only the first and last comlumns. This command will list all files under svn control plus the ones that are not (ignored files are not listed). But IMNSHO, I would rather use "svn export" since it has the major advantage to export/copy *only* the information that will be under version control and delegates all the separation of information to subversion, which is, of course, the best at doing this anyway. - -- Regards, EddyP ============================================= "Imagination is more important than knowledge" A.Einstein -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFGDmFSY8Chqv3NRNoRAo4CAJ9yEf57TlmuN/Ct5VxmWedSt1okWQCgzUMY M+i8IdVE3MIw3Dz5JGDUsQw= =GUZj -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
