sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
- From: Arwed von Merkatz <v.merkatz AT gmx.net>
- To: sm-discuss <sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] section build files
- Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2004 21:56:32 +0200
On Sun, Apr 25, 2004 at 03:40:11PM -0400, Sergey A. Lipnevich wrote:
> I believe the name would be misleading, it shouldn't be negative. Maybe
> SECTION_FUNCTIONS=[on|off]. I believe that a default should be "on" to
> always check for <spell>/../FUNCTIONS and source it, unless
> SECTION_FUNCTIONS=off. I believe this is cheap and consistent with usage
> of other files, such as PRE_INSTALL or POST_REMOVE (you don't tell
> sorcery anything to use these). Other variants: SECTION_INHERIT, or even
> SECTION_LIB.
You're right, that makes more sense. I'd say SECTION_FUNCTIONS is the
best name to go with a file named FUNCTIONS.
> Andrew wrote:
>
> >>>So if USE_DEFAULT_FUNCTIONS is on then sorcery won't look in FUNCTIONS.
> >>>Should the default value of USE_DEFAULT_FUNCTIONS be off (look in
> >>>FUNCTIONS).
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>I'd say default should be off. The whole setting is mostly useful for
> >>sections like perl-cpan and php-pear, so having it default to reading
> >>FUNCTIONS when it exists should be sane.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Too much inverting here...
> >USE_DEFAULT_FUNCTIONS=off would mean "source FUNCTIONS" (dont use all
> >the default functions)
> >
> >USE_DEFAULT_FUNCTIONS=on would mean "DONT source FUNCTIONS" (use the
> >functions sorcery gives us)
> >
> >So what you're saying is the default value should be "on" (dont source
> >FUNCTIONS).
> >
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> SM-Discuss mailing list
> SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss
>
--
Arwed v. Merkatz Source Mage GNU/Linux developer
http://www.sourcemage.org
-
[SM-Discuss] section build files,
Treeve Jelbert, 04/25/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] section build files,
Andrew, 04/25/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] section build files,
Arwed von Merkatz, 04/25/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] section build files,
Andrew, 04/25/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] section build files,
Arwed von Merkatz, 04/25/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] section build files,
Andrew, 04/25/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] section build files,
Arwed von Merkatz, 04/25/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] section build files, Andrew, 04/25/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] section build files, Sergey A. Lipnevich, 04/25/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] section build files, Arwed von Merkatz, 04/25/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] section build files, Andrew, 04/25/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] section build files, Arwed von Merkatz, 04/25/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] section build files, Andrew, 04/25/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] section build files, Seth Alan Woolley, 04/26/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] section build files, Andrew, 04/26/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] section build files, Arwed von Merkatz, 04/26/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] section build files, Andrew, 04/26/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] section build files,
Arwed von Merkatz, 04/25/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] section build files,
Andrew, 04/25/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] section build files,
Arwed von Merkatz, 04/25/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] section build files,
Andrew, 04/25/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] section build files,
Arwed von Merkatz, 04/25/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] section build files,
Andrew, 04/25/2004
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.