Dan McGee wrote:
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 9:02 PM, Allan McRae<[email protected]> wrote:
Jürgen Hötzel wrote:
Hi,
I doubt this was by intention:
errors in build() functions are only fatal, if "--log" is enabled.
I just made a buggy pkg because some "install ..." commands
where not handled by "|| return 1".
Our PKGBUILDs are cluttert full of "|| return 1". Failing commands in
build functions should always result in an build error.
Signed-off-by: Juergen Hoetzel <[email protected]>
---
scripts/makepkg.sh.in | 7 ++++---
1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/scripts/makepkg.sh.in b/scripts/makepkg.sh.in
index f46b7f8..84d4599 100644
--- a/scripts/makepkg.sh.in
+++ b/scripts/makepkg.sh.in
@@ -703,6 +703,7 @@ run_build() {
local ret=0
if [ "$LOGGING" -eq 1 ]; then
BUILDLOG="${startdir}/${pkgbase}-${pkgver}-${pkgrel}-${CARCH}-build.log"
+ BUILDLOG_CMD="tee $BUILDLOG"
if [ -f "$BUILDLOG" ]; then
local i=1
while true; do
@@ -714,11 +715,11 @@ run_build() {
done
mv "$BUILDLOG" "$BUILDLOG.$i"
fi
-
- build 2>&1 | tee "$BUILDLOG"; ret=${PIPESTATUS[0]}
else
- build 2>&1 || ret=$?
+ BUILDLOG_CMD="cat -"
fi
+
+ build 2>&1 | ${BUILDLOG_CMD}; ret=${PIPESTATUS[0]}
# reset our shell options
eval "$shellopts"
Seems fine. We will want to do the "cat -" thing in run_package too to
catch packaging errors. In fact, as the tee mechanism is so different
there, we will need to check that it actually catches errors...
Should I wait to apply this then, or take it for now and wait for another patch?
I like to keep the run_build and run_package functions as similar as
possible (one day I might get around to refactoring them... especially
as I want to add run_check it the future). So I would prefer to wait
until this is fix for both functions in as similar way as possible.
Allan
_______________________________________________
pacman-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev
