Le Mer 10 juin 2009 10:59, Florian Festi a écrit :
Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
1. something auto-triggered transparently (didn't we learn anything
from
existing package triggers?).
I think you make the wrong comparison here (although I admit that the
matching names make it tempting).
On Wed, 10 Jun 2009, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
Le Mer 10 juin 2009 10:59, Florian Festi a écrit :
Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
1. something auto-triggered transparently (didn't we learn anything
from
existing package triggers?).
I think you make the wrong comparison here (although I admit that
On Wed, 10 Jun 2009, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
Le Mer 10 juin 2009 13:21, Panu Matilainen a écrit :
File triggers are certainly not the holy grail of packaging, they're
only
applicaple to a pretty limited set of situations, from the top of my
head:
1) Caches updaters which you only want to
Le Mer 10 juin 2009 15:29, Panu Matilainen a écrit :
On Wed, 10 Jun 2009, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
And this is why the actual script to do whatever magic it
needs to do, when it needs to, would be in a distros fontconfig
package, not rpm.
This is totally orthogonal to invoking this script
Colin Walters wrote:
If such a thing were to be implemented it'd probably be good to use it
to clean out the wishlist in general, like handling %clean and even
%build automatically (e.g. if we see a configure script, just assume
to call %{configure}, see a Makefile, just assume to call make,
On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 11:22 AM, Kevin Koflerkevin.kof...@chello.at wrote:
Colin Walters wrote:
If such a thing were to be implemented it'd probably be good to use it
to clean out the wishlist in general, like handling %clean and even
%build automatically (e.g. if we see a configure script,
Le samedi 06 juin 2009 à 13:01 +0300, Panu Matilainen a écrit :
Yes, having each and every spec carry the %{!?foo:¤%¤%} macro goo makes
no sense at all.
That is pretty much what we did for fonts in F11. However many packagers
just ignored the change and didn't fix their packages.
For
Le dimanche 07 juin 2009 à 12:31 +0300, Panu Matilainen a écrit :
Btw your initial suggestion of collecting the common stuff into macros
and converting packages to use them would be useful on several ways:
a) Finding out the things that *are* common among lots of packages. While
numerous
On Mon, 2009-06-08 at 13:25 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
I personally think it would be a huge mistake to have stuff happen
automatically based on filename/location heuristics. Naming collisions
happen all the time (for example GNOME recently decided that a third of
our fonts were ODF
Le lundi 08 juin 2009 à 09:34 -0400, Matthias Clasen a écrit :
On Mon, 2009-06-08 at 13:25 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
I personally think it would be a huge mistake to have stuff happen
automatically based on filename/location heuristics. Naming collisions
happen all the time (for
On Mon, 2009-06-08 at 13:31 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
Le dimanche 07 juin 2009 à 12:31 +0300, Panu Matilainen a écrit :
Btw your initial suggestion of collecting the common stuff into macros
and converting packages to use them would be useful on several ways:
a) Finding out the
Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
Le samedi 06 juin 2009 à 13:01 +0300, Panu Matilainen a écrit :
Yes, having each and every spec carry the %{!?foo:¤%¤%} macro goo makes
no sense at all.
That is pretty much what we did for fonts in F11. However many packagers
just ignored the change and didn't
On Sat, Jun 6, 2009 at 6:01 AM, Panu Matilainenpmati...@laiskiainen.org wrote:
The hardest part is getting the design right the first time, there's no
changing an api that is exposed to packages.
It's definitely better to get things right the first time, but one
thing missing from the system
Le lundi 08 juin 2009 à 20:13 +0200, Florian Festi a écrit :
This approach has several shortcomings (forgetting the technical
details). It requires a lot of data be shipped with each package.
I think you misunderstood me. I'd want the definition for %font of %
icon-dir to be factored-out
On Fri, 5 Jun 2009, Ray Strode wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 2:05 PM, Adam Williamsonawill...@redhat.com wrote:
On Fri, 2009-06-05 at 13:50 -0400, Ray Strode wrote:
It seems to me it'd make sense to convert all these kinds of snippets
into macros. Am I right, or is there a reason
On Sat, 2009-06-06 at 15:47 +0300, Panu Matilainen wrote:
On Sat, 6 Jun 2009, Panu Matilainen wrote:
I'm glad to see I'm not the only one who replies to himself :)
Also for ultimate power the file triggers need to be in headers so that all
triggers are ready for action before the
Hi,
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 2:05 PM, Adam Williamsonawill...@redhat.com wrote:
On Fri, 2009-06-05 at 13:50 -0400, Ray Strode wrote:
It seems to me it'd make sense to convert all these kinds of snippets
into macros. Am I right, or is there a reason against doing this?
It would be awesome to
17 matches
Mail list logo
