Subject: Re: New checkflist mechanism too strict ?
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Luke Mewburn <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 07/22/2002 22:11:32
On Mon, Jul 22, 2002 at 09:53:21AM +0100, David Laight wrote:
| On Mon, Jul 22, 2002 at 10:17:41AM +0200, Xavier HUMBERT wrote:
| > Even if I don't update my userland every day, I regulary build into
| > /usr/build. And I build a distriobution (-d flag), in order to have
| > up-to-date /etc scripts (security, rc.blah, etc.)
| > Since "checkflist" mechanism has been introduced, make distribution fails
| > every 2 or 3 other builds, on some manpage, I presume.
| Yes... I noticed that,
| Fortunately it is the last thing the build (currently) does.
| I guess you could add a '-' to the front of the command in the makefile.
| Maybe that check ought to be optional?
No, it should not be optional.
The addition of "make checkflist" was added to the "maketars" target in
distrib/sets/Makefile to ensure that the generated tar files have all
the appropriate contents. In Xavier's case, his /usr/build appears to
have a couple of now-obsolete files.
The "sets" target in distrib/sets/Makefile depends upon "maketars",
and is only called in the top-level Makefile or etc/Makefile by
"make release" or "make snapshot".
AFAICT, a "./build.sh -d DESTDIR" invokes "make distribution", so it
shouldn't even invoke checkflist-as-part-of-maketars. It's only if
you add "-R RELEASEDIR" to the build.sh invocation that it should.