c2c-oerpscenario team mailing list archive

[xrg <xrg@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Sunday 16 January 2011, you wrote:
> Public bug reported:
> 
> This is installing OpenERP Web Client 6 rc2 on Linux Maverick (Ubuntu
> 10.10).
> 
> A flurry of warnings are produced.  See this transcript below:
>...
> Are these (both the "no previously-included directory..." and "no files
> found series") of any consequence?  Should I worry?  Is the result of the
> installation dependable?
> 

These warnings are harmless. They are produced because in MANIFEST.in we define 
all possible patterns of files, and setup.py worries for not finding all of 
them.

In general, warnings are warnings, not errors. They mean that something wasn't 
perfect, but they don't necessarily mean that something is wrong.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of C2C
OERPScenario, which is subscribed to the OpenERP Project Group.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/703406

Title:
  Warnings while installing

Status in OpenObject Web Client:
  New

Bug description:
  This is installing OpenERP Web Client 6 rc2 on Linux Maverick (Ubuntu
  10.10).

  A flurry of warnings are produced.  See this transcript below:

  
  $ version=6.0.0-rc2
  $ cd /usr/local/src/openerp_fp
  $ tar xfz ~/Téléchargements/openerp-web-$version.tar.gz
  $ cd openerp-web-$version
  $ python setup.py install
  [...]
  no previously-included directories found matching 'dist'
  no previously-included directories found matching 'lib'
  warning: no files found matching '*.cfg' under directory 'addons/openerp'
  warning: no files found matching '*.mo' under directory 'addons/openerp'
  warning: no files found matching '*.txt' under directory 'addons/openerp'
  warning: no files found matching '*.rst' under directory 'addons/openerp'
  warning: no files found matching '*.ico' under directory 'addons/openerp'
  warning: no files found matching '*.swf' under directory 'addons/openerp'
  warning: no files found matching '*.mo' under directory 'addons/view_calendar'
  warning: no files found matching '*.rst' under directory 'addons/view_calendar'
  warning: no files found matching '*.jpg' under directory 'addons/view_calendar'
  warning: no files found matching '*.html' under directory 'addons/view_calendar'
  warning: no files found matching '*.htc' under directory 'addons/view_calendar'
  warning: no files found matching '*.swf' under directory 'addons/view_calendar'
  warning: no files found matching '*.mo' under directory 'addons/view_diagram'
  warning: no files found matching '*.rst' under directory 'addons/view_diagram'
  warning: no files found matching '*.html' under directory 'addons/view_diagram'
  warning: no files found matching '*.htc' under directory 'addons/view_diagram'
  warning: no files found matching '*.swf' under directory 'addons/view_diagram'
  warning: no files found matching '*.mo' under directory 'addons/view_graph'
  warning: no files found matching '*.rst' under directory 'addons/view_graph'
  warning: no files found matching '*.gif' under directory 'addons/view_graph'
  warning: no files found matching '*.png' under directory 'addons/view_graph'
  warning: no files found matching '*.jpg' under directory 'addons/view_graph'
  warning: no files found matching '*.html' under directory 'addons/view_graph'
  warning: no files found matching '*.css' under directory 'addons/view_graph'
  warning: no files found matching '*.htc' under directory 'addons/view_graph'
  warning: no files found matching '*.mo' under directory 'addons/widget_ckeditor'
  warning: no files found matching '*.rst' under directory 'addons/widget_ckeditor'
  warning: no files found matching '*.jpg' under directory 'addons/widget_ckeditor'
  warning: no files found matching '*.htc' under directory 'addons/widget_ckeditor'
  warning: no files found matching '*.swf' under directory 'addons/widget_ckeditor'
  [...]

  
  Are these (both the "no previously-included directory..." and "no files found series") of any consequence?  Should I worry?  Is the result of the installation dependable?

  If everything is nice and the diagnostics are meaningless, they should
  rather not be produced.  If they are unavoidable for some technical
  reason, some explanation in README or otherwise should warn the user
  that such diagnostics are to be expected, and ignored.

  Thanks for your attention.

  If not at all, then likely that these should not be produced.