[Pkg-xen-devel] [PATCH 1/9] Rework "debian/rules: Do not try to move EFI binaries on armhf"

[Hans van Kranenburg]

Hi,

On 7/17/20 7:39 AM, Elliott Mitchell wrote:

First explain what the problem is. You have a subject line with "Do not
try to move EFI binaries on armhf", so the first next thing I'm
wondering about is why there are no EFI binaries on armhf, or are there,
but they're not supposed to be moved?

This might be as simple as "ROFLOL armhf of course has no EFI binaries
because armhf can't do EFI at all LOL".

> What is actually needed

Why?

> is a move command which fails if the move
> fails, but succeeds if no files are moved.  A combination of find/xargs
> can match this

The old code already did not try to mv anything for armhf) ;; having a
noop in place for that?

> so use what works.

Be more specific and explicit. Don't make me look at the changes and try
to invent whatever the 'what works' was that you were thinking about
while typing those words.

> This reverts commit 8ff478af61fa8a87806a89bbd618cd9da2354302.
> ---
>  debian/rules | 5 +----
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/debian/rules b/debian/rules
> index b21c9e6948..29a561b99f 100755
> --- a/debian/rules
> +++ b/debian/rules
> @@ -230,10 +230,7 @@ override_dh_auto_install: $(TEMPLATED_FILES)
>  		-C tools/firmware install-shim
>  	:
>  	@# Inexplicably, upstream puts the efi binares in usr/lib64
> -	case $(flavour) in \
> -		armhf) ;; \
> -		*) mv $t/usr/lib64/efi/* $t/boot/. ;; \
> -	esac
> +	find "$t/usr/lib64/efi" -mindepth 1 -maxdepth 1 -print0 | xargs -r -0 mv -t "$t/boot"
>  	:
>  	@# This file contains an arch-specific path and we put it
>  	@# in xen-utils-common, an arch-all package.  But the
> 

Share more of your thoughts. Better be verbose than terse in the
explanation. Not everyone else has gone through the same thought process
already, that makes the penny drop, and then have it all of it suddenly
look so simple and obvious.

Hans