Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-discuss - Re: [SM-Discuss] splitting cvs spells

sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Andrew <afrayedknot AT thefrayedknot.armory.com>
  • To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] splitting cvs spells
  • Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2006 00:42:32 -0700

On Sat, Oct 07, 2006 at 08:27:20AM +0500, Alexander Tsamutali wrote:
> So even if i have the latest version of gtk+ some gnome_spell can force
> recompilation? And what if we have minor update and my current gtk+
> version is not the latest but enough for gnome_spell - there is no need
> to recompile gtk+! The only way to ensure that we realy need to update
> gtk+ is to compare currently installed version and what our gnome_spell
> needs.

The force_depends would be conditional upon the gtk+ version. So it
wouldn't force recompilation unless the version is different. "version
is different" of course could be defined as "major version bump" so
minor version bumps would not force recompilation. Spells have a pretty
wide range of freedom over how they use an interface. Please consider
the possibilities more carefully.


>
> Second argument for multibersion support in sorcery are simplifications
> for users. Currently many spells ask users about installing CVS, DEVEL,
> SOME_OTHER version. Consider the folloing beaautiful future:
>
> $ cast firefox
> ok, the latest stable firefox is 2.0.8
> downloading firefox-2.0.8.tar.bz2
> ...
>
> $ cast --with-versions firefox
> please choose the version you love:
> [0] CVS (unstable)
> [1] 2.5rc1 (unstable)
> [2] 2.0.8 (stable)
> [3] 1.5.0.7 (old)
> [4] 1.0.8 (historical)
> downloading firefox-2.5rc1.tar.bz2

Sorry, maybe im being dense here, how is this simpler or even different
from what already exists? The only difference I see is the default case
you skip the query, and the --with-versions thing you add a query which
could already exist in a spell without touching sorcery at all.

Please explain what exactly you want sorcery to do, and how that
functionality is not currently possible _in_any_way_ with existing
interfaces sorcery already provides to spells.

-Andrew

--
_________________________________________________________________________
| Andrew D. Stitt | acedit at armory.com | astitt at sourcemage.org |
| irc: afrayedknot | Sorcery Team Lead | ftp://t.armory.com/ |
| 1024D/D39B096C | 76E4 728A 04EE 62B2 A09A 96D7 4D9E 239B D39B 096C |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page