Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2012 11:38:42 +0100
From: Natanael Copa <ncopa@alpinelinux.org>
To: Dubiousjim <lists+alpine-devel@jimpryor.net>
Cc: alpine-devel@lists.alpinelinux.org
Subject: Re: [alpine-devel] REPODEST vs ~/.cache/abuild
Message-ID: <20121128113842.28df627d@ncopa-desktop.alpinelinux.org>
In-Reply-To: <20121127132811.GA69074@vaio.jimpryor.net>
References: <20121127132811.GA69074@vaio.jimpryor.net>
Precedence: list
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Tue, 27 Nov 2012 08:28:11 -0500
Dubiousjim <lists+alpine-devel@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
>       presently.

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!

-nc


---
Unsubscribe:  alpine-devel+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org
Help:         alpine-devel+help@lists.alpinelinux.org
---