Hi Daniel,
Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> > > I'm guessing that debhelper on buster installs that file as
> > > /usr/share/doc/.../changelog.md.gz or something,
> >
> > It is only installed as
> > /usr/share/doc/zsh-syntax-highlighting/changelog at that time.
> >
> > Not sure why the path used by the upstream build system to install it,
> > seems no more present.
>
> That's odd. Upstream's 'make install' does 'cp changelog.md $(DOC_DIR)'
> and that part hasn't changed between 0.5.0 (stretch) and 0.6.0 (buster).
> It's even
> the same in upstream's HEAD.
*nod*
> > > but I don't have a buster build env handy to investigate. Is someone
> > > able to look into this?
> >
> > Done: Dropping override_dh_installchangelogs already suffices to make
> > the package build again.
> >
> > I though wonder if that isn't actually a regression in a recent
> > debhelper release.
>
> You mean, a regression whereby debhelper removes the .md suffix
> overzealously?
Maybe. Or something else.
> According to debhelper's own changelog, there have been
> several changes to dh_installchangelogs in debhelper 11.3{,.1,.2}, so a
> regression is not inconceivable.
Exactly. Especially because nothing in these entries sounded close
enough to cause such a behaviour on purpose. But maybe I haven't
looked close enough.
> However, all those mentions of 'upstream changelogs' in dh's own
> changelog make me wonder if dh got smarter, is recognising
> changelog.md as an upstream changelog, and by itself avoids
> installing changelog twice --- which makes the 'rm' in z-sy-h's
> d/rules redundant.
That seems to be the reason. Running with DH_VERBOSE=1 I see this line:
mv
debian/zsh-syntax-highlighting/usr/share/doc/zsh-syntax-highlighting/changelog.md
debian/zsh-syntax-highlighting/usr/share/doc/zsh-syntax-highlighting/changelog
This corresponds to a change in 11.3:
* dh_installchangelogs: Look for changelog files installed by the
upstream build system in the package build dir (i.e. d/<pkg>/
and *not* debian/tmp!) and use them in preference to the one in the
source package where available. This avoids some cases of duplicated
upstream changelogs. Thanks to Evgeni Golov for the suggestion.
(Closes: #513521)
> If that's the case, then removing the override_dh_installchangelogs
> target would be the correct fix.
Yes.
> Does this make senes?
Now that I verified that your guess was right, yes. :-)
Regards, Axel
--
,''`. | Axel Beckert <a...@debian.org>, https://people.debian.org/~abe/
: :' : | Debian Developer, ftp.ch.debian.org Admin
`. `' | 4096R: 2517 B724 C5F6 CA99 5329 6E61 2FF9 CD59 6126 16B5
`- | 1024D: F067 EA27 26B9 C3FC 1486 202E C09E 1D89 9593 0EDE
