Frank Küster wrote: > Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb: > > > On Fri, Feb 25, 2005 at 07:54:27PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote: > >> Christoph Berg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb: > >> > Re: Daniel Burrows in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> >> I'd imagine that it doesn't use mv for the same reason "install" > >> >> doesn't; > >> >> ie, its purpose is to COPY files, not MOVE them. > >> > > >> > As I understood it, the question was about moving stuff from > >> > debian/tmp to debian/package. The stuff in debian/tmp should get > >> > removed by the clean target anyway, so it doesn't hurt to move instead > >> > of copying it. > >> > >> Indeed. Especially when people tell me that dh_install is the successor > >> of dh_movefiles, which even has move in its name... > > > > debhelper (4.0.0) unstable; urgency=low > > > > * dh_movefiles has long been a sore point in debhelper. Inherited > > from debstd, its interface and implementation suck, and I have > > maintained > > it while never really deigning to use it. Now there is a remplacment: > > dh_install, which ... > > - copies files, doesn't move them. Closes: #75360, #82649 > > What do you want to say with this? Do you want to tell me that using mv > is bad? If yes, why? It's not in the bug reports.
The changelog entry explains why dh_movefiles is implemented using tar. The bug reports explain a significant problem with using mv: loss of idempotency. -- see shy jo
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
