On Sat, Dec 03, 2011 at 11:56:09AM -0600, Dan McGee wrote:
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 6:44 PM, Lukas Fleischer <archlinux@cryptocrack.de> wrote:
On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 10:10:14AM -0600, Dan McGee wrote:
Be consistent with all other contrib scripts and support the "--help" command line switch. Fixes FS#27258. Where are we on consistency here with what we expect out of scripts in
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 2:49 AM, Lukas Fleischer <archlinux@cryptocrack.de> wrote: scripts/? All of these support -h/--help/-V/--version; is it logical to require the same for scripts in contrib?
You surely know... :) I only saw that bug report and found it weird that paclist displays a usage message if we pass no parameters but does nothing when it is invoked with "-h" (as opposed to all other contrib scripts).
Well my gut tells me "yes, we should do this". Take a look at scripts/Makefile.am, namely the first two lines- it would be nice if we could do this in contrib/ as well.
I'll apply this; awaiting further patches for fixing the rest of the scripts and adding the above automake option. :)
Alright! What to do with contrib scripts that currently do not have a version defined? I noticed that we're pretty inconsistent here: * All "official" scripts use the same version number as pacman(8). Also, we include "(pacman)" in the version output, here. * Some contrib scripts use their own versioning scheme (e.g. there's bacman 0.2.1 in master). * Some contrib scripts don't support "--version" and hence don't have a version number at all. What we can do now is either tag scripts, that don't have a version number yet, with an initial value (such as 1.0.0) or always use the pacman version number. I'd prefer the latter. Opinions?
-Dan