Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 17:11:40 +0100
From: Natanael Copa <ncopa@alpinelinux.org>
To: Natanael Copa <ncopa@alpinelinux.org>
Cc: Dubiousjim <lists+alpine-devel@jimpryor.net>,
 alpine-devel@lists.alpinelinux.org
Subject: Re: [alpine-devel] REPODEST vs ~/.cache/abuild
Message-ID: <20130207171140.427fb662@ncopa-desktop.alpinelinux.org>
In-Reply-To: <20121128113842.28df627d@ncopa-desktop.alpinelinux.org>
References: <20121127132811.GA69074@vaio.jimpryor.net>
	<20121128113842.28df627d@ncopa-desktop.alpinelinux.org>
Precedence: list
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Wed, 28 Nov 2012 11:38:42 +0100
Natanael Copa <ncopa@alpinelinux.org> wrote:

> 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.

I have implemented this now. It was infact very very simple.

It is in git:
http://git.alpinelinux.org/cgit/abuild/commit/?id=5f453f1cdec8bc2c4174878fdd818b5e9ad13505

I don't think it will break anything either.

Please test how it works.

Thanks!

-nc


---
Unsubscribe:  alpine-devel+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org
Help:         alpine-devel+help@lists.alpinelinux.org
---