Allan McRae wrote:
One thing I just thought of. If it is going to be separated by repo could that line say ":: group testing/base-devel" to improve clarity?
This is exactly what Jakob reported as inconsistent, but wondered if it was still ok. That's funny, we have been arguing for one week about backend+callback vs frontend implementation. I could no longer find any inconvenients of the backend+callback solution, even though I knew I didn't like callback much. /* callback to handle questions from libalpm transactions (yes/no) */ /* TODO this is one of the worst ever functions written. void *data ? wtf */ void cb_trans_conv(pmtransconv_t event, void *data1, void *data2, void *data3, int *response) This todo also applies to this function : /* callback to handle messages/notifications from libalpm transactions */ void cb_trans_evt(pmtransevt_t event, void *data1, void *data2) This is the problem Jakob has, he just has data1 and data2 for 3 data : group name, repo name, list of group members. This is ridiculous, *alpm* callbacks are really crap. It's bad I couldn't remember this problem before it actually showed up.
Members (2): flex-2.5.35-4 make-3.82-2
:: Install whole content from group testing/base-devel? [Y/n] :: group base-devel:
Members (9): autoconf-2.68-1 automake-1.11.1-1 bison-2.4.3-1 fakeroot-1.14.4-2 gcc-4.5.1-1 libtool-2.4-1 m4-1.4.15-1 patch-2.6.1-1 pkg-config-0.25-2
:: Install whole content from group core/base-devel? [Y/n] ---stop paste---