sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
- From: Paul <dufflebunk AT dufflebunk.homeip.net>
- To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] rpmunpack in basesystem
- Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 11:24:02 -0400
If it is removed, there are going to be references to RPM stuff in the
sorcery scripts without the programs existing. This inherently decreases
the stability of the scripts as they now have to rely on spells having
the correct dependencies or the scripts will start doing weird things.
It would be sufficient, I think, to have a check for the rpmunpack and
cpio binaries before they used in the unpack stuff.
On Wed, 2004-19-05 at 08:13 -0700, Eric Sandall wrote:
> Quoting Paul <dufflebunk AT dufflebunk.homeip.net>:
> > Cleanness aside, you are correct, everything should be fine.
>
> What about Cleanness? Cleanness of Sorcery? Dependencies? Most think this
> is a
> good idea, but if it's really a bad idea if we think about it, let's spell
> it
> out as I don't want to degrade stability just so it matches an idea of
> correctness.
>
> -sandalle
>
> --
> Eric Sandall | Source Mage GNU/Linux Developer
> eric AT sandall.us PGP: 0xA8EFDD61 | http://www.sourcemage.org/
> http://eric.sandall.us/ | SysAdmin @ Inst. Shock Physics @ WSU
> http://counter.li.org/ #196285 | http://www.shock.wsu.edu/
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
> _______________________________________________
> SM-Discuss mailing list
> SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-
[SM-Discuss] rpmunpack in basesystem,
Eric Sandall, 05/18/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] rpmunpack in basesystem, Seth Alan Woolley, 05/18/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] rpmunpack in basesystem,
Jason Flatt, 05/19/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] rpmunpack in basesystem,
Ladislav Hagara, 05/19/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] rpmunpack in basesystem, Eric Sandall, 05/19/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] rpmunpack in basesystem, Andrew, 05/19/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] rpmunpack in basesystem,
Ladislav Hagara, 05/19/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] rpmunpack in basesystem,
Paul, 05/19/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] rpmunpack in basesystem,
Eric Sandall, 05/19/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] rpmunpack in basesystem,
Paul, 05/19/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] rpmunpack in basesystem,
Eric Sandall, 05/19/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] rpmunpack in basesystem,
Paul, 05/19/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] rpmunpack in basesystem,
Eric Sandall, 05/19/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] rpmunpack in basesystem, Andrew, 05/19/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] rpmunpack in basesystem, Eric Sandall, 05/19/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] rpmunpack in basesystem, Paul, 05/19/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] rpmunpack in basesystem,
Eric Sandall, 05/19/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] rpmunpack in basesystem,
Paul, 05/19/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] rpmunpack in basesystem,
Eric Sandall, 05/19/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] rpmunpack in basesystem,
Paul, 05/19/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] rpmunpack in basesystem,
Eric Sandall, 05/19/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] rpmunpack in basesystem,
Casey Harkins, 05/19/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] rpmunpack in basesystem,
Eric Sandall, 05/19/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] rpmunpack in basesystem, Andrew, 05/19/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] rpmunpack in basesystem,
Eric Sandall, 05/19/2004
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
- RE: [SM-Discuss] rpmunpack in basesystem, evraire, 05/19/2004
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.