[pacman-dev] [PATCH] scripts/library: rewrite parse_options

Allan McRae allan at archlinux.org
Wed Aug 17 20:22:18 EDT 2011

On 18/08/11 09:34, Dave Reisner wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 08:57:55AM +1000, Allan McRae wrote:
>> On 18/08/11 08:27, Dan McGee wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 3:40 PM, Dave Reisner<d at falconindy.com>   wrote:
>>>> In addition to being what I feel is a cleaner and faster implementation,
>>>> we avoid the use of eval by normalizing option arguments into a global
>>>> array which is then set after a successful call to parse_options.
>>>> This trims out the idea of having multiple arguments to a single option,
>>>> making our parsing algorithm a little more sane. We never took advantage of
>>>> this in makepkg (for the one option that feasibly supports it), and I
>>>> think we've overlooked a much simpler solution in pacman-key. Since
>>>> actions are limited to 1 at a time the leftover positional parameters
>>>> become the keys or keyfiles which are acted upon.
>>>> Also added is a new test directory test/scripts with a harness for
>>>> parse_options, run as part of make check.
>>>> Signed-off-by: Dave Reisner<dreisner at archlinux.org>
>>>> ---
>>>> Thoughts? I know Allan wasn't quite sold on this, as the downside is that we
>>>> sort of pigeonhole ourselves into using the non-optional parameter as arguments
>>>> to our action. This has zero effect on makepkg.
>>>> I've also thought to add --option=arg syntax parsing, but I'm not sure we need
>>>> this.
>>> Allan, was deferring to you on this.
>> Well, I was deferring to you as Dave is right that I was never sold
>> on this...
>> Unless I am missing something, this does have a minor effect on
>> makepkg.  In git "makepkg --pkg foo bar" builds only foo and bar
>> from a split package.
> And, imo, this introduces bizzare unexpected behavior. With the
> "standard" getopt{,_long}, passing something such as:
>    --pkg foo bar
> I'd expect bar to be completely unrelated to the flag. Not the case
> here, and this behavior isn't really documented clearly at all. We don't
> even properly handle arguments with whitespace anymore. Not such a big
> deal for makepkg, but I think it's reasonable that pacman-key might some
> day need to import a key from a file with a space in the name.

I thought the whitespace issue was fixed but testing now I see it is 
not.  That is definitely something that needs addressed.

>> I guess with this patch we would have to quote the package names in
>> some way (like is needed on the current maint release).  So we would
>> need to revert changes made to the makepkg documentation when the
>> multiple arguments stuff was added.
> We can (should?) follow pacman here and separate multiple arguments by
> commas. I'm going to channel Dan and call out "consistency" here.

You mean like "pacman -S pkg1,pkg2"?   Fairly sure we do not do that! 
So I call consistency...  Where do we use commas in pacman options?

And it is going to be just the --pkg option in makepkg that requires 
such quoting and commas as far as I can tell.  All pacman-key options 
will still take a non-comma separated list.


More information about the pacman-dev mailing list