On 30-09-2021 08:44:33 +0200, Michał Górny wrote: > On Thu, 2021-09-30 at 08:40 +0200, Fabian Groffen wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Would it be possible to have some switch (e.g. --style=legacy) that > > controls this new vs. the old behaviour? Would perhaps allow > > applications that parse the output to work via setting this in the > > global opts. > > Patches welcome. It shouldn't be hard, my commit shows which files need > to be edited to alter the prefixes and how to pass them into ebd.
I see. > > In addition, much like the colour map, how do you see this change in > > light of eclasses, init-scripts, etc. that also use the same scheme as > > Portage at the moment? Would you expect to change those too at some > > point? > > Eclasses are supposed to use standard einfo, elog... functions, so they > should just work™. If someone's reinventing the wheel, it's not my > problem. > > Init scripts aren't supposed to be used inside the PM, so that's out of > scope. I was just referring to the overall "feel" of Gentoo, which your work changes. It is ok that you don't plan on doing anything there. > > Final question, am I understanding correctly that normal lines are not > > prefixed with something? Would it be, for consistency, alignment, and > > certainty of selecting rows something to use a prefix for those lines > > too (assuming they aren't at this point)? > > I don't know, we've never done that. I suppose it would be possible but > it is even more controversial and unlike the proposed changes, it would > actually require mangling the process output. If I remember correctly, Portage already does. In which case, doing this (even if it were adding leading spaces) would not be that much work? Thanks, Fabian -- Fabian Groffen Gentoo on a different level
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
