| 1 |
On Wednesday 26 October 2005 23:24, Thomas de Grenier de Latour wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sun, 23 Oct 2005 11:54:07 +0900 |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> Jason Stubbs <jstubbs@g.o> wrote: |
| 5 |
> > Seeing that interspersed einfo and ewarn calls will be separated |
| 6 |
> > by class anyway, is there any need to play with the ordering at |
| 7 |
> > all? |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> That's also one thing i don't understand with elog: why does it |
| 10 |
> separate messages in many files instead of using a single one with |
| 11 |
> a simple markup? In the implementation of a similar feature i had |
| 12 |
> done as part of bug #37491, i was using something like: |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
I like the markup idea to keep ordering. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
> ... |
| 17 |
> [ebuild:/path/to/foo-bar-1.2.ebuild package:cat/foo-bar-1.2 |
| 18 |
> step:post_inst date:1234567890] |
| 19 |
> [emessage:info] |
| 20 |
> You can try to run "foo-bar --break-things", it's fun. |
| 21 |
> [emessage:warn] |
| 22 |
> Don't do it too often tho, it hurts. |
| 23 |
> [emessage:info] |
| 24 |
> Also, run "foo-bar --check-things" from time to time. |
| 25 |
> ... |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> It was really easy to parse and pretty-print, and was giving |
| 28 |
> messages in the right order. And in some cases, it matters: for |
| 29 |
> instance, the following would have been missleading: |
| 30 |
> * You can try to run "foo-bar --destroy-things", it's fun. |
| 31 |
> * Also, run "foo-bar --check-things" from time to time. |
| 32 |
> * Don't do it too often tho, it hurts. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
Personally, I think that using the einfo and ewarn classes purely as methods |
| 35 |
to get different text formatting is bad practice. Seeing as I can't think of |
| 36 |
a case where interspersing einfo and ewarn to convey a single message is used |
| 37 |
beyond formatting, I don't really mind that things come out unordered though. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
> Also, one thing i had seen when working on this old patches was that |
| 40 |
> einfos from eclasses really clutter the logs you get. I mean, few |
| 41 |
> packages don't have at least an "Applying something.patch" or a |
| 42 |
> "Cleaning orphan /usr/lib/python/plopplop.pyo", etc. I think it |
| 43 |
> would be a good idea to provide some einfo-like functions which do |
| 44 |
> not write to logs, just for eclass writers who want color when they |
| 45 |
> feel the need to tell the world what their code is currently doing. |
| 46 |
> That would reduce a lot the number of packages with false-positive |
| 47 |
> elogs. |
| 48 |
|
| 49 |
I'm for that too. |
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
-- |
| 52 |
Jason Stubbs |
| 53 |
-- |
| 54 |
gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives