Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Symlinking by default would be nice. #37

Closed
mcourteaux opened this issue Jan 26, 2023 · 4 comments
Closed

Symlinking by default would be nice. #37

mcourteaux opened this issue Jan 26, 2023 · 4 comments
Assignees
Labels
question Further information is requested

Comments

@mcourteaux
Copy link

I'd suggest adding a keep_symlinks option. The zip command needs an additional --symlinks to avoid copying the file pointed to, instead of just archiving the symlink.

Tar does this by default.

This behavior makes sense when you are packaging stuff for release (so I'd even consider making this default to True).

@TheDoctor0 TheDoctor0 self-assigned this Jan 27, 2023
@TheDoctor0 TheDoctor0 added the enhancement New feature or request label Jan 27, 2023
@TheDoctor0
Copy link
Owner

TheDoctor0 commented Jan 27, 2023

Hey @mcourteaux.
I am a little hesitant to make that a default behavior, so I encourage you to use the custom parameter instead that can be used to pass any additional arguments to the executed command.

@TheDoctor0 TheDoctor0 added question Further information is requested and removed enhancement New feature or request labels Jan 27, 2023
@mcourteaux
Copy link
Author

Yeah, for me I was packaging a lot of *.so files double or tripple (just because of the way the symlinking with the version numbers works). I even tried --symlinks in custom, but it didn't work. Perhaps, the docker image has a zip-executable that doesn't have that function?

That's why I switched to .tar.gz for the linux release.

@TheDoctor0
Copy link
Owner

@mcourteaux you may try again with the --symlinks custom parameter as there was an issue with it for the zip command as that was also fixed in the latest release.

@mcourteaux
Copy link
Author

Aaah that most likely explains the behavior I observed! Good catch! To be honest, I don't have the need to test it again, but the code fix you linked will almost certainly make it work indeed. Thanks for looking into this!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
question Further information is requested
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants