Public SourceMage Discussion List

[Arwed von Merkatz <v.merkatz AT gmx.net>]

On Sun, Apr 25, 2004 at 01:00:35PM -0700, Andrew wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 25, 2004 at 09:56:32PM +0200, Arwed von Merkatz wrote:
> > 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.
> > 
> Is this something that should only exist on a per section basis? Why
> not have the option for overriding everything for the grimoire, then
> have the section level override that if necessary (its only one more
> line of code for me anyways).
> 
> That would make SECTION_FUNCTIONS a rather confusing variable name. So
> why not "USE_FUNCTIONS" And we can have a FUNCTIONS file optionally
> exist (and be executable at the grimoire and section level, just like
> with API_VERSION.
 
That's even better. What about the semantics if both one at the grimoire
level and one at the section level exist? Imo it would be best to first
source the grimoire wide one and then the section level one, that would
make it possible to provide stuff like a default_python_build at the
grimoire level that does the usual python install stuff (python
setup.py, ...).

-- 
Arwed v. Merkatz                              Source Mage GNU/Linux developer
                                                    http://www.sourcemage.org