Alexey Dokuchaev píše v st 19. 03. 2008 v 09:18 +0000: > On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 10:02:33AM +0100, Pav Lucistnik wrote: > > Alexey Dokuchaev p??e v ?t 18. 03. 2008 v 18:15 +0000: > > > > > Not to mention that -R should've probably be used instead or -r, and we > > > generally try not to mute installation of files/links (as opposed to > > > dirs). > > > > Since you mentioned it, I wonder, why you think it's useful to silence > > the mkdir calls? > > This question was raised before several times. When I started working > on ports back some n years, I noticed that lots of MKDIR's were muted, > while INSTALL_FOO's were not. I thought that this is probably for the > same reason why we do not generate a commit message for directory > creating in CVS, just for the files. In other words, creating a > directory normally followed by some file(s) being put in it, thus MKDIR > itself carries less information and probably just making things overly > noisy (yet verbose).
Still, the mkdir call may fall, and then the failure is less obvious to
the user/porter.
> To tell you the truth, I'm all hands for a policy here. If we decide
> (like we had decided with patch files naming) upon certain convention,
> whatever it'll be, I will just follow that. I'd love to see more
> consistency and order in our Ports Collection.
Oh no more policies, please!
--
Pav Lucistnik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
EMACS: Eight Megabytes And Continually Swapping
signature.asc
Description: Toto je digitálně podepsaná část zprávy
