Managing required packages in nALFS

Vassili Dzuba vassili.dzuba at wanadoo.fr
Fri Oct 4 03:08:03 PDT 2002


"Mark Ellis" <mark.uzumati at virgin.net> a écrit dans le message de news:
20021004080721.GA770 at ElCapitan.oval.net...

(snip)
>
> Wouldn't it be better to use the presence of a build log for a
> particular
> package to determine if it was installed, rather than an arbitrary
> <stamp>
> element ? Or better yet, add a status of some kind in the log. Then
> implement that <packageinfo> idea from a while back containing
> <depends>,
> <requires> or whatever.
>

The build log exists even if the build of the package failed and the package
had not been installed.
Adding a status in the log would work but it's a little more complicated.
As the two functions (log vs dependency check) are different, i don't see
any problem with
having separate log and stamp files. It allows to see the list of installed
packages with a
simple "ls" (but of course a grep on the log files is not very complicated
either).

The <check> element is a very minimal way to describe the dependency,
and we surely could do better.


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

Vassili


-- 
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