Closed #2755 as completed via 7f59c7dd2f4ff1476bec5c59f37babb1fd231e5a.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2755#event-11755075899
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
As for arg2 and the question of "should it be an aggregate count?", I've come
to realize that it actually should **not** be an aggregate since that would
prevent the script from detecting a package upgrade. It would also be
inconsistent with regular triggers. Hence, no aggregate count in #2883.
> Note that there's no technical reason for _not_ adding the second argument
> (the number of triggering packages) to transaction scriplets here, too. It's
> the same code path underneath.
OK, looking closer, the challenge with transactional file triggers and package
counts is that we can't
Note that there's no technical reason for *not* adding the second argument (the
number of triggering packages) to transaction scriplets here, too. It's the
same code path underneath.
Whether it's useful or not is another question but I'll probably lean towards
consistency here and include it.
Good point! We shouldn't just blindly copy what the normal triggers do here.
There's enough difference that it makes sense to step back for a moment and
think about what functionality and use cases we really want to cover. Thanks,
I'll take that into account :smile:
--
Reply to this email
The thing to ponder about is whether there are other arguments that should be
passed in addition or in stead of these. The only "vision" or "design" behind
this ticket description is "something close enough to other scriptlets that
someone familiar with should feel at home". Which may leave
Thanks, the part about usefulness is actually on point :smile: That said, I
haven't given it too much thought either, this is just the most obvious
solution that comes to mind. I'll ponder about it a bit more but there's
probably not much to ponder about anyway.
--
Reply to this email
Aggregate is what I thought of when writing the description, I don't see
anything else making much sense. But, it's not like I've given this any deep
meditation. Usefulness is all that matters for the arguments, otherwise we
could just as well not bother :sweat_smile:
--
Reply to this email
> * Non-trans scriptlets have should get a second argument reflecting the
> triggering package count
I wonder if we want the triggering package count (`arg2`) to be an *aggregate*
count of all the triggering packages or just that of the *first* match?
There's a subtle difference in the
Splitting this from #2655 as this is a clearly separate thing that should be
doable without massive redesign of the whole thing:
- First argument should reflect the triggered package count
- Non-trans scriptlets have should get a second argument reflecting the
triggering package count
--
10 matches
Mail list logo
