[oe] [RFC] unpackaged files

[Frans Meulenbroeks]

2010/10/11 J. L. <vwyodapink at gmail.com>:
> On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 5:02 AM, Roman I Khimov <khimov at altell.ru> wrote:
>> В сообщении от Понедельник 11 октября 2010 15:51:05 автор Frans Meulenbroeks
>> написал:
>>>  - a way to indicate that a file is installed but purposedly not
>>> packaged (e.g. I have such a thing in mythtv with a README file)
>>> This could be by creating a pseudo-package (like -unused or -ignore)
>>> which can be used to add files that are explicitly not packaged
>>
>> Shouldn't such files be removed with do_install_append()?

rethinking this (after my previous mail) would we get an issue because
some files are staged but not packaged (which is generally not the
case, but I am thinking about gcc-cross and friends)
>
> my uneducated suggestion would be dont remove them and do something
> like Frans suggests, reason being I am noticing packages that do not
> build with files that you would expect especially ones with -dev tags.
> or even some not being made like libgcc-dev. But like one off the top
> of my head would be if you install libpcap and libcap-dev you still do
> not get a pcap.h to use if you compile something on the machine your
> built those packages into the image of.
>

it is not my proposal to make this a real installable package. I just
want a mechanism that you can use to tell that a file while being
there is on purpose not packaged
Wrt your example: I'd say if pcap.h comes from libcpcap, it should
probably go into libpcap-dev (or maybe libcap-dev).

Frans