Page 2 of 2

Re: package check

Posted: 1. Oct 2009, 21:44
by gapan
Because there are cases where these are actually the correct ownerships.

Re: package check

Posted: 1. Oct 2009, 22:27
by thenktor
gapan wrote:Because there are cases where these are actually the correct ownerships.
That's why it should ask first. I know these rare cases ;)

Re: package check

Posted: 2. Oct 2009, 10:40
by JRD
Good idea thenktor !

Re: package check

Posted: 2. Oct 2009, 20:15
by Shador
I don't want buildscripts to become interactive. It's annoying when you're off for half an hour and it stops already after 10 minutes with a prompt, just to go on another 10 min afterwards. :)

It would be OK for me to have aggressive corrections on per default and to have an option to disable them. But there's a point where SLKBUILDs take away too much control from the packager and becomes bloated. So I'm a bit uncertain if we should at all change this behaviour.

Re: package check

Posted: 3. Oct 2009, 07:26
by gapan
I believe that we should not change that. Too much automation is bad. Prompts are a bad idea in my opinion. What if a package has hundreds of those files? Will you answer as many prompts? If the makefiles are bad and install files with wrong ownerships, then you should either: 1) correct the makefiles (and probably alert their developer) and/or 2) fix the ownerships in build().

Re: package check

Posted: 3. Oct 2009, 12:36
by thenktor
OK, i'm convinced. Don't change slkbuild for this.