Re: mknetrel: sub-package splitting, 2nd try

[Charles Wilson <cwilson at ece dot gatech dot edu>]

Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:

> > It seems to me that moving files (complete with dir structures) into
> > separate $inst trees, just to make tha tar command simpler, is less
> > than ideal.
> Why do you think that?

libpng12:
  mkdir -p $inst-libpng12/usr/bin
  mv $inst/usr/bin/cygpng-12.dll $inst-libpng12/usr/bin/
  cd $inst-libpng12
  tar cvjf libpng12.tar.bz2 *

vs.

  cd $inst
  tar cvjf libpng12.tar.bz2 usr/bin/cyg*.dll

You're assuming -- and it may be a safe assumption -- that all splitting 
will be done via one of two methods:
  1) separate make install-* targets
  2) whole subtrees
I'm thinking more of ad-hoc splitting, where there are not separate make 
install-* targets, AND some files within a given $inst directory will 
end up in one package, and others from the same dir will end up in a 
different package.  See my relatively recent post on how gettext was 
split up.

What I'd need to do, under your scheme, basically use
  cd $inst
  tar -c -T $filelist -f - | tar -C $inst-other -x -f -
  to move the appropriate files, and then use tar AGAIN to create the 
actual archive.  Kinda silly, BUT, having said all of that:

I think your assumptions are probably safe, in general, and lead to a 
nice understandable structure in mknetrel's code.  I can double tar if I 
need to.


> > How does the existing mknetrel do it?  (or does existing mknetrel have
> > the ability to split up packages at all?
> I didn't think so.  Did I overlook something?

??? I'll have to look...


> Btw: you don't seem to have set a Mail-Followup-To: header, do you
>      mind (or actually like) getting all messages twice?

Actually, my mail reader is smart.  I only see one copy, even if I get two.

--Chuck