On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 10:55:46PM -0500, Shawn Walker wrote: > My personal belief has been that if an implicit refresh (such as that > done by install, image-update, etc.) can't be performed due to network > connectivity issues, then we should not fail or require --no-refresh. > The failure should occur later when we attempt to retrieve a manifest, > etc.
I apologize for my previous response. It had been about 9 hours since I'd had anything to eat. I'm fine with implicit refresh not failing, but in that case we ought to remove the --no-refresh option from install entirely. There's no point to having it exist if we're going to suppress failures that occur during an implicit refresh -- there's no explicit refresh option to install. My concern with the transport is twofold. First, I don't want to get in the habit of running the captive portal test more than once. Secondly, I was under the impression that the transport's callers would prefer not to disclose a lot of information about their underlying reasons for calling. However, if you're less concerned about this second point, and don't have a problem with refreshes knowing whether they're implicit or not, we could pass a flag to get_catalog that indicates whether the portal test should be run or not. Since 9929 makes the call occur in the transport method, instead of hiding it within the initialization routine, it's a bit more obvious what's going on. This aspect of the design didn't pertain directly to the changes in 9929, and they were rather urgently needed by AI, which is part of the reason why I was impatient to get this fix checked in. (I was hungry, too. *rar*). In any case, I apologize for the tone in the previous e-mail. -j _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
