SUMMARY: alfs direction

silverspurg at comcast.net silverspurg at comcast.net
Sat Nov 26 02:26:20 PST 2005


> Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
>
>> M.Canales.es wrote:
>> [snip]
>>
>>
>> Yes, that's good. :) Except that it would almost be better done as
>> individual files, like:
>>
>> 028-gcc-pass1.configure
>> 028-gcc-pass1.make
>> 028-gcc-pass1.install
>>
>> So that they could be called and sent individually.

When writing Vowel I went through several iterations where I attempted to 
break down the different stages of a package installation into filename 
extension groups or numberical codes like that.  I went through three or 
four different systems before it became apparent that, no matter what you 
do, there's always going to be a package or two that doesn't fit nicely 
into the schema.

I asked myself what the difference really was between any of those and 
decided that the only real difference is the apparent user at different 
stages.  My installation files are now a single file for each package (for 
maintainability) separated only by a directive which instructs the engine 
to change the apparent user and continue on.  Just like following the 
book.  Except the book doesn't change user much.

Steven
--



More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list