1 |
On Sun, 1 Apr 2012 22:47:23 +0200 |
2 |
Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
> > There's no guarantee, of course, that the amount of space in ${T} in |
4 |
> > pkg_pretend is anything like the amount of space that will be |
5 |
> > available for the build, but check-reqs is deliberately designed to |
6 |
> > be wildly inaccurate. |
7 |
> |
8 |
> Yes because being wildly accurate in this case is such a great |
9 |
> possibility here. Why don't you delight us with your vision of wildly |
10 |
> accurate space prediction, mister? |
11 |
|
12 |
You should probably look at who wrote check-reqs in the first place, |
13 |
and why it was designed the way it was... You'll note in particular how |
14 |
the code just has a best attempt at finding a solution, and how it |
15 |
deliberately just gives a warning message, not a fatal error, if |
16 |
either it can't figure out whether a requirement is met or if it |
17 |
thinks that one isn't. You know, as if it were designed under the |
18 |
assumption that accuracy wouldn't be possible... |
19 |
|
20 |
Or you could just post more noise to the list in an attempt to stir up |
21 |
trouble. Your call. |
22 |
|
23 |
-- |
24 |
Ciaran McCreesh |