On Mon 09 Jul 2012 at 02:34PM, Danek Duvall wrote:
> Dan Price wrote:
>
> > https://cr.opensolaris.org/action/browse/pkg/dp/pkg-progress-cleanup/
>
> printengine.py:
>
> - line 92: __el1 doesn't seem to be used anywhere. Did you mean to say
> __el here?
Sigh, yes. Thanks. Strangely pylint misses this.
> progress.py:
>
> - line 2323: Why not -30? Or was there an off-by-on error here,
> previously?
Probably a typo; I've set it to -30.
> t_elf.py:
>
> - I'd suggest using libc.so instead of libmlib.so; the latter isn't
> guaranteed to be on the system, and I don't think there's anything
> special about it.
Done; I had meant to fix that remnant but forgot about it.
> - I'd also figure out whether the 64-bit arch for the system and plug
> that into the /usr/bin paths, rather than testing for the existence of
> each path, since we could end up not testing as much as we thought.
> You can use pkg.portable.getisainfo()[0] here, I think (though that
> interface is, um, somewhat suspect ...).
Yah, will do; I went looking for this but was having trouble finding it.
> pkg5unittest.py:
>
> - line 2776: no need for str(), or double space after colon.
>
> Also, in fixing 7154379, could you confirm Brock's question in the bug
> about making sure that skipping conflicting action checking when
> nothingtodo() doesn't mean "pkg install -n foo" will succeed in cases where
> conflicting action checking would make it fail?
I don't think so; -n doesn't interact with nothingtodo() AFAICT in any
way. Am I missing something subtle? I updated the bug with the same
question.
-dp
--
Daniel Price, Solaris Kernel Engineering
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
