On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 6:46 PM, Allan McRae <[email protected]> wrote: > Eric Bélanger wrote: >> >> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 8:55 AM, Eric Bélanger <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 3:13 AM, Ray Rashif <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> 2009/11/3 Eric Bélanger <[email protected]> >>>> >>>> This is really convenient, but would it not be good if the >>>> symlink(s) are >>>> removed upon --clean? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Sure, that can be easily done. >>> >>> >> >> I'm not sure if removing the symlinks if --clean is used is a good >> idea after all. After a successful build, you would probably want to >> have the package's symlink to be still there so you can test/install >> the package. >> > > I agree that keeping the current symlink is good, but then do you have to > remove old symlinks manually? I think this is a situation with no best > answer, but removing symlinks on --clean may be the better one.
I've haven't thought about old symlinks. I'll remove them on --clean. > > And here is another thought I just had. Do we want to error out if the > symlinnk creation fails but the building of the package is successful? Or > jsut print a warning? > Maybe a warning would be better.
