[pacman-dev] No .install messages standard yet?

[Roman Kyrylych]

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:
http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/pacman-dev/2006-May/000341.html
Example: http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/pacman-dev/2006-July/000401.html
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)