Re: [alpine-devel] REPODEST vs ~/.cache/abuild
On Tue, 27 Nov 2012 08:28:11 -0500
Dubiousjim <lists+alpine-devel_at_jimpryor.net> wrote:
> Here is an alternative, just off the top of my head:
> * if REPODEST is unset, handle ~/.cache/abuild as presently.
This sounds good.
> * if REPODEST is set and ~/.cache/abuild doesn't exist,then
> use REPODEST in place of ~/.cache/abuild
> * if REPODEST is set and ~/.cache/abuild exists (and points to a
> separate location than REPODEST), handle ~/.cache/abuild as
I wonder if this would be simpler:
* if REPODEST is set and does not resolve to same location as
~/.cache/abuild, then use REPODEST instead of ~/.cache/abuild
Worst case for this would be that scripts depending on current
behaviour would generate index twice? I think we should try improve
buildrepo while here.
If you still prefer what you suggested, then I'm ok with that too.
> * if REPODEST is set and ~/.cache/abuild points to it (either is a
> symlink to REPODEST, or REPODEST resolves to ~/.cache/abuild),
> then use REPODEST in place of ~/.cache/abuild. (Instead of trying
> to place the packages under REPODEST and symlinks to them in what
> is ultimately the same location.)
Yes, this sounds good.
Thanks you very much for your feedback!
Received on Wed Nov 28 2012 - 11:38:42 UTC