Adding to "Cleaning Up'

Pierre Labastie pierre.labastie at neuf.fr
Sun Jan 12 13:12:52 PST 2014


Le 12/01/2014 17:58, Bruce Dubbs a écrit :
> Pierre Labastie wrote:
>> Le 11/01/2014 18:13, Bruce Dubbs a écrit :
>>> Pierre Labastie wrote:
>>>> Le 11/01/2014 04:18, Bruce Dubbs a écrit :
>>>>> Pierre Labastie wrote:
>>>>>> Le 10/01/2014 00:08, Bruce Dubbs a écrit :
>>>>>>> Pierre,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>       In LFS, I want to add an instruction to chapter06/revisedchroot.xml
>>>>>>> which is actually titled "Cleaning Up".  When I tested jhalfs,
>>>>>>> 129-revisedchroot is not run in the Makefile, but
>>>>>>> lfs-commands/chapter06/129-revisedchroot is created.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The revised 'chroot' command should not be run but the new 'rm' command
>>>>>>> should be.  I'd like to see a role="noauto" (or equivalent) for
>>>>>>> <userinput> to skip the chroot command, but also run 129-revisedchroot
>>>>>>> in the Makefile.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Would that be hard to do?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>       -- Bruce
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think I could try to do that during the week-end. The easy part is to run
>>>>>> the script in the Makefile. The harder part is to split the script, because
>>>>>> the chroot instruction is needed too (variable CHROOT2 in the Makefile), but
>>>>>> of course should not be run when the script is run. So I think I'll split the
>>>>>> script into 129-1-revisedchroot and 129-2-revisedchroot, use the -1 for
>>>>>> extracting the chroot command and run the -2 in the Makefile. For
>>>>>> discriminating the two strings, I do not think a special role="" attribute is
>>>>>> needed, but I need to be sure that the new command to be run does not contain
>>>>>> "chroot". Is that the case?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, that's the case, but it may be useful to have a general way to add
>>>>> an instruction but not have jhalfs include it.  That's what I had in
>>>>> mind with the role attribute.  Another thought is something like
>>>>> role='comment' and have the instruction(s) in that code chunk preceded
>>>>> with a #.
>>>>>
>>>>>      -- Bruce
>>>>>
>>>> Why not use "role='nodump'"? It is enough for jhalfs.
>>>
>>> OK, I forgot about that.  Now we only need to get the section in the
>>> Makefile.
>>>

Thanks for the patch. I used it for testing. I have adapted jhalfs to include
everything, which does not have role="nodump", in the Makefile. And the chroot
commands are extracted to other scriptlets. It seems to work well. Problem:
what I have done does not work with previous versions, where there are no role
attributes. I have to think of another strategy, which does not use the role
attribute. Sorry I did not think about it before. But I have to delay the commit.

regards
Pierre





More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list