Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-grimoire - Re: [SM-Grimoire] glibc

sm-grimoire AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Discussion of Spells and Grimoire items

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Seth Woolley <seth AT tautology.org>
  • To: Duane Malcolm <d.malcolm AT auckland.ac.nz>
  • Cc: Hamish Greig <hgreig AT bigpond.net.au>, Grimoire <sm-grimoire AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Grimoire] glibc
  • Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2003 19:41:16 -0700 (PDT)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

How about asking, if you selected to remove from the queue, if you would
like the spell held (default to no). This is much better than
incrementing the updated date, because sometimes I want to get prompted
again, and sometimes I don't. sorcery show-held could then be used to see
what is being held. I'm pretty sure holding a spell prevents it from
showing in the next update queue (I don't know how else it could be
implemented).

When you unhold it, then the updated date would have it show up in the
next sorcery queue as expected. sorcery hold and sorcery unhold are
already available, as is sorcery show-held. This could snap right in ;).

If you are on test grimoire, you should be damn well using the history
review feature (sorcery review-queue), or you shoot yourself in the foot.
It's for testing things, and I agree with Hamish, although I'd like to see
Geoff's needs accomodated.

We also should have different kinds of holds, like "hold always" "hold
unless security" "hold unless version or security". While we're at it,
why don't we just do away with the administrator as Microsoft does?

OK, maybe not that last sentence, but it's something to consider.

Sth

On Thu, 2 Oct 2003, Duane Malcolm wrote:

> If you "hold" a spell will the "UPDATED" field overide this? Just a
> question. I have no opinion, though your reasoning is good
>
> Duane.
>
> Hamish Greig wrote:
> > I have been making some changes to the spell, every time a major spell
> > like
> > glibc changes I think it should be tested by everyone. I want to know that
> > what I have changed has no bad consequences.
> > It "needs" to be fully tested before it goes into stable.
> > Sorcery now has a history showing feature so you can view my reasons for
> > wanting the spell checked. You can also remove it from the queue if you
> > don't
> > want to cast it, but it will be put back into the queue unless you
> > manually
> > change the date in /var/state/sorcery/packages.
> > Maybe choosing to remove a spell from the queue should alter the date
> > stamp of
> > that spell in that file too ?
> > I think my last few changes were removing gettext trigger , adding
> > libiconv
> > trigger removing an "echo" into two alien files that caused "non-portable
> > whitespace" warnings from every spell cast (actually removing the files
> > altogether so make install does install them). If these changes didn't
> > need
> > testing or rebuilding to (un)register triggers then I wouldn't have
> > changed
> > UPDATED.
> > If you can tell me another way to get spell changes tested by everyone
> > without
> > changing UPDATED then I will use it.
> > Hamish
> >
> > On Thu, 2 Oct 2003 03:59, Geoffrey Derber wrote:
> >
> >>I update my system on average about once a week, once every two weeks as
> >>time permits. I have noticed that EVERY time for the last month, two
> >>months, glibc requires a rebuild. I understand a forced rebuild because
> >>of say a security issue or some other issues. But for most issues just
> >>because of a bug fix in the glibc spell doesn't necessarily mean we need
> >>to rebuild it as well. Can we stop modifying the UPDATED field so much.
> >> Please update it if deamed absolutely necissary. I may be wrong in my
> >>assesment, but the amount I see it is forcing a rebuild just seems
> >>excessive to me.
> >>
> >>Btw, yes I have checked to make sure it updated correctly each time by
> >>creating a new queue to make sure it wasn't in there. So it's not that
> >>it the rebuild has failed and the next time I update the previous update
> >>is showing up.
> >>
> >>Geoff
> >>
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>SM-Grimoire mailing list
> >>SM-Grimoire AT lists.ibiblio.org
> >>http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-grimoire
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> SM-Grimoire mailing list
> SM-Grimoire AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-grimoire
>

- --
Seth Alan Woolley <seth at tautology.org>, SPAM/UCE is unauthorized
Key id 7BEACC7D = 2978 0BD1 BA48 B671 C1EB 93F7 EDF4 3CDF 7BEA CC7D
Full Key at seth.tautology.org and pgp.mit.edu. info: www.gnupg.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQE/e5BR7fQ833vqzH0RAmb5AKCXnJe5BaG0LfZA9S7cZ8Rvwq9HCwCfYzAC
zaQNKG8WHZpt6tJDwlch6Rs=
=Y+qc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page