Lots of ideas

Felipe Contreras al593181 at mail.mty.itesm.mx
Fri Dec 28 00:36:26 PST 2001

On Thu, Dec 27, 2001 at 08:08:31PM +0100, Neven Has wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 26, 2001 at 11:58:16PM -0600, Felipe Contreras wrote:
> > > As I said in some other mail, I think it would be nice to separate package
> > > information from its building instructions.
> > 
> > Good, might be with another backend? I don't know, it might be better
> > since the information will not be commands.
> I'm not sure what you mean with another backend? I was thinking about:
> <package>
>     <package_info>
>         <name></name>
>         <version></version>
>         <location></location>
>     </package_info>
>     <package_instructions>
>         <prebuild></prebuild>
>         <build></build>
>         <postbuild></postbuild>
>     </package_instructions>
> </package>

Well, I was thinking about parsers. Obviosly the data is of the
package_info and package_instructions are different and the code to
parse them should be different. But if you are thinking about a single
program to do it all, then what I said has nothing to do with it.

> We would have to think some better element names thought.
> > > Still at http://sourcer.sourceforge.net, I assume?
> > > 0.2.2 was the last one I checked.
> > 
> > Not really, that's a "parser" for the format of sourcer, but I have been
> > working on an ALFS parser. Currently all exept one "tag" are parsed, but
> > it's not functional since it just outputs all the commands parsed. If
> > some kind of "grouping" is used in the official ALFS format the I can
> > make it usefull.
> As I said, you really shouldn't depend on that grouping or anything similar.
> Could you send what you have? I'm curious to see what the problem is.

Why not?, as I see it it's pretty much more understandable, natural and
simple a "creatingdirs" group to identify a group of commands.

The problem is: I want my program to take input arguments to reach parts
of the profile. The first input argument I think that should be
something like package, but there are no package tag for some commands,
there is no identification for those, there are just there. The parser
should do nasty stuff to reach those commands, like receive instead of
an understandable "creatingdirs" a number. Basically that's the problem.

It might not seem important to add groups to the alfs format just to
make my parser work nice, but anyway I hope you can see that it is a
Good Thing.

Felipe Contreras
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe alfs-discuss' in the subject header of the message

More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list