[pacman-dev] Groups. Again.

Xavier chantry.xavier at gmail.com
Mon Oct 4 03:26:41 EDT 2010

Allan McRae wrote:
> One thing I just thought of.   If it is going to be separated by
> repo could that line say ":: group testing/base-devel" to improve
> clarity?

This is exactly what Jakob reported as inconsistent, but wondered if it was
still ok.

That's funny, we have been arguing for one week about backend+callback vs
frontend implementation. I could no longer find any inconvenients of the
backend+callback solution, even though I knew I didn't like callback much.

/* callback to handle questions from libalpm transactions (yes/no) */
/* TODO this is one of the worst ever functions written. void *data ? wtf */
void cb_trans_conv(pmtransconv_t event, void *data1, void *data2,
                   void *data3, int *response)

This todo also applies to this function :
/* callback to handle messages/notifications from libalpm transactions */
void cb_trans_evt(pmtransevt_t event, void *data1, void *data2)

This is the problem Jakob has, he just has data1 and data2 for 3 data : group
name, repo name, list of group members.
This is ridiculous, *alpm* callbacks are really crap.
It's bad I couldn't remember this problem before it actually showed up.

> >Members (2): flex-2.5.35-4 make-3.82-2
> >
> >:: Install whole content from group testing/base-devel? [Y/n]
> >:: group base-devel:
> >
> >Members (9): autoconf-2.68-1 automake-1.11.1-1 bison-2.4.3-1
> >fakeroot-1.14.4-2 gcc-4.5.1-1
> >libtool-2.4-1 m4-1.4.15-1 patch-2.6.1-1 pkg-config-0.25-2
> >
> >:: Install whole content from group core/base-devel? [Y/n]
> >---stop paste---
> >

More information about the pacman-dev mailing list