I figured that it was spelled out somewhere...it is more that whatever that one-way doc pattern was going to be (pacman.conf -> alpm-hooks) makes the context for understanding the "OVERRIDING HOOKS" section tougher to consume from alpm-hooks (e.g. there is no "See Also: pacman.conf"). On Sat, Mar 17, 2018 at 6:43 PM, Andrew Gregory wrote:

On 03/17/18 at 10:36pm, Sean Enck wrote:

...

If you read the "man alpm-hooks" it alludes to a priority-based directory overriding behavior. But the directory/priority queue for when hooks are loaded isn't stated [0]

Some quick searching indicates: "/etc/pacman.d/hooks" [1] is (at least one example) place that will override "/usr/share/libalpm/hooks".

The directories/priorities should be enumerated in the docs. Even if this is enumerated in another doc page somewhere, since the behavior really _matters_ in alpm-hooks it should probably be at least re-enumerated here if not become the source-of-record for this information.

--Sean

[0] https://www.archlinux.org/pacman/alpm-hooks.5.html [1] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/User:Allan/Pacman_Hooks

man pacman.conf

On Sat, Mar 17, 2018 at 9:28 PM, Eli Schwartz wrote:

...

I figured that it was spelled out somewhere...it is more that whatever

...

one-way doc pattern was going to be (pacman.conf -> alpm-hooks) makes the context for understanding the "OVERRIDING HOOKS" section tougher to consume from alpm-hooks (e.g. there is no "See Also: pacman.conf").

On Sat, Mar 17, 2018 at 6:43 PM, Andrew Gregory < andrew.gregory.8@gmail.com> wrote:

...

On 03/17/18 at 10:36pm, Sean Enck wrote:

...

If you read the "man alpm-hooks" it alludes to a priority-based

...

...

...

overriding behavior. But the directory/priority queue for when hooks are loaded isn't stated [0]

Some quick searching indicates: "/etc/pacman.d/hooks" [1] is (at least one example) place that will override "/usr/share/libalpm/hooks".

The directories/priorities should be enumerated in the docs. Even if

On 03/17/2018 07:38 PM, Sean Enck wrote: that directory this

...

...

...

is enumerated in another doc page somewhere, since the behavior really _matters_ in alpm-hooks it should probably be at least re-enumerated here if not become the source-of-record for this information.

--Sean

[0] https://www.archlinux.org/pacman/alpm-hooks.5.html [1] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/User:Allan/Pacman_Hooks

man pacman.conf

1) Mailing list etiquette is to reply via bottom-posting, this gets exponentially more confusing when some posters top-post while the rest bottom post.

2) Hook dirs depend on your configuration file, of course, and more importantly, they depend on what tool you use to perform upgrades (as this is responsible for parsing the configuration file, theoretically doing whatever it wants to the results, and then dealing with libalpm via that). That being said, patches welcome!

-- Eli Schwartz Bug Wrangler and Trusted User

1) Sorry, as soon as I hit "Send" I had regrets :/ Ok, so I just want to make sure that I'm clear where we are talking (I may be making an assumption/reading into your response too deeply, so want to confirm). libalpm, I know, can/is used by more than pacman. So, yes, maybe alpm-hooks can't/shouldn't reference pacman.conf in the manpage, certainly understandable. Does that mean that: "Hooks may be overriden by placing a file with the same name in a higher priority hook directory. Hooks may be disabled by overriding them with a symlink to /dev/null" becomes something like (maybe there is a better suggestion here): "Hooks may be overriden by placing a file with the same name in a higher priority hook directory as passed to libalpm. Hooks may be disabled by overriding them with a symlink to /dev/null" That would be the only thing I would be looking to do/change, are we saying the same thing and/or am I missing something? I'm not trying to get petty on the docs/wording, but it's easy to forget (or it was for me) that I'm talking about the the alpm world and not the pacman world so even a minor wording change, if there was one, would've jogged my memory ("What passes hooks to libalpm...? oh yeah...pacman...") and I would've never had to mail the mailinglist...