Niko Tyni wrote: > On Thu, Jan 17, 2008 at 04:53:18PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote: > > > If dpkg-shlibdeps didn't print that message at all and silently skipped > > separated debug symbol files, I'd be inclined to make dh_shlibdeps > > not exclude anything in usr/lib/debug. If the message is intentional or > > cannot be gotten rid of, it seems that dh_shlibdeps should be changed to > > use a tighter exclude pattern, maybe including usr/lib/debug/*.so* while > > excluding anything else under usr/lib/debug .. > > How about adding a dh_shlibdeps switch that would make it scan > usr/lib/debug too, while still skipping it by default? This could > then be mentioned in the description for the upcoming lintian check > (#461350).
I'd rather just have it heuristically do the right thing, assuming there
is a heuristic that works.
It seems possible, though unlikely, that a debug library might be
installed in /usr/lib/deubg/$foo/ rather than directly in
/usr/lib/debug/. So only looking in /usr/lib/debug/*.so* or the like
might miss some that should be processed.
I'm pretty sure that anything in
/usr/lib/debug/{lib,lib64,usr,bin,sbin,opt,dev}/ is going to be
separated debug symbols, and it could just ignore those directories and
process the rest.
Of course that annoyingly hardcodes a lot of FHS information, and
Raphael's idea to look for an empty "Dynamic Section" in objdump output
might be the best approach.
--
see shy jo
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
