I feel like I haven't wrote enough emails to the list today, so here is another. :) I wrote out this little chart for my own good today and noticed that the flow is relatively linear, but some of the checks for options play some crazy tricks on how it flows. In some sense, the operations I list below can all be split up without overlap (read: be made into functions). I'm wondering if we should think a little more about program flow now that all these options such as 'don't check dependencies' and 'use existing source' are present? There are some very long sections of code all indented inside an if-block, and it makes changing things a lot harder (ex. the generate integrity/check integrity/extract sources block). What if before each definable section, we do the 'if' statement instead, even if it means two sections in a row might have the same if clause? I don't know if that explanation made sense, so let me know. makepkg program flow and steps: determine fakeroot status (using -F) source makepkg.conf set correct options from $ARGLIST check for sudo convert relative $PKGDEST to absolute if $CLEANCACHE clean cache unset all variables we use check if buildscript exists source buildscript check for no-nos in build script enter fakeroot if necessary (calling makepkg again) check runtime dependencies check buildtime dependencies retrieve sources loop through $INTEGRITY_CHECK if $GENINTEG generate integrity checks else check integrity checks extract sources check file ownership, remove pkg/, use distcc, use ccache if $LOGGING log build build remove info/doc files move man pages if necessary remove possibly empty /usr/share directory compress man pages strip binaries remove libtool files remove empty directories get package meta info and make .PKGINFO check for an install script build a filelist tar up the package if $CLEANUP then cleanup if $RMDEPS then remove installed dependencies if $INSTALL then install with sudo or as root, etc. -Dan