[pacman-dev] No .install messages standard yet?
roman.kyrylych at gmail.com
Mon Mar 5 03:59:06 EST 2007
2007/3/5, Dan McGee <dpmcgee at gmail.com>:
> On 3/4/07, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 3/4/07, kfs1 at online.no <kfs1 at online.no> wrote:
> > > On Sun, 04 Mar 2007 22:22:06 +0100, Alessio 'mOLOk' Bolognino
> > > <themolok.ml at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I think you should define a standard for the .install message to avoid
> > > > the actual anarchy and proliferation of very different styles.
> > > > Just my 2c,
> > > >
> > >
> > > hmm i don't know about this since sometimes different messages requires
> > > different wrappings..?
> > > but also it would be nice to have a generic wrapping...
> > Because install files are actually executed by bash, we should/could
> > standardize this by making some bash functions (similar to those in
> > /etc/rc.d/functions). This would make it much easier to change in the
> > long run.
> > If anyone has any propositions, please post them here.
> I had a thought that a stopgap solution would be to put some 'default'
> echo lines in PKGBUILD.proto. This would encourage use of consistent
> messages with new packages at the very least.
> On a side note, I think adding a message=('whatever') option to
> makepkg/pacman is a good idea, it is a very old FR in Flyspray that
> didn't make it into 3.0 but should be in 3.1.
See also this thread:
The patch provided there is already merged.
If I understand this correctly - this is better way to catch install
messages by GUI frontends.
Of course this functionality should be wrapped with some nice functions.
Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)
More information about the pacman-dev