| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Ned Ludd wrote: |
| 5 |
> How do you think we should handle it? |
| 6 |
> Should we install a post_sync in a postinst phase outside of portage's |
| 7 |
> handling if and only if not post_sync already exists? |
| 8 |
> Should we change it to handled a postsync.d by default? |
| 9 |
> Should we do both? I'm open as heck but would like to start to |
| 10 |
> finalize then document it's behavior. I feel it could be one of the |
| 11 |
> next untapped really useful features of portage. glsa-checking, news |
| 12 |
> handling, search db updating, and stuff etc.. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Given the existing support for /etc/portage/bin/post_sync, the user has the freedom to do anything they want. If a program needs to make use of the post_sync trigger, it's documentation can simply state that a certain command needs the be run and the user can add that command to their post_sync script. Is that not easy and flexible enough? |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Zac |
| 18 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 19 |
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux) |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
iD8DBQFEWsnT/ejvha5XGaMRAmOsAKDTaCc4GA16hO4o24OKxOqkTFhbLgCguQEA |
| 22 |
cxh1Y3+c/o4CGWcnc+Jh8zY= |
| 23 |
=7K0g |
| 24 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives