On Thu, 10 May 2012 18:03:37 +0200 "Jason A. Donenfeld" <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Ciaran McCreesh > <[email protected]> wrote: > > We can't modify exhereses programatically. If it's going to be > > parsed, it has to be in a dedicated file with a well defined format. > > Yea... I thought you would say this. The conclusion of that statement > leads to a manifest-like situation, I guess. > > But maybe it's not necessary. Sha1s are very unique long weird > strings. A find and replace on this is nearly guaranteed to be okay.
You don't even know which file to look in to do that replacement. Also. No parsing bash! > I know, though, that that doesn't sit right and lacks a general > feeling of correctness. But view it this way -- > > A tool that does these updates does not need to be an officially > supported built-in method of doing things. It could be a very simple > bash script that calls the cave commands to get the current sha1s, > calls the cave commands to do the fetching, and then runs sed. > Something simple, where you wouldn't call it a "official tool for > dealing with exheres", but just a common routine developers tend to > use to update things. No parsing bash! No even suggesting people try parsing bash! No changes that might make it easier for people to try to parse bash! > Or we can move the discussion in the manifest direction; I don't know. No parsing bash! -- Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Exherbo-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.exherbo.org/mailman/listinfo/exherbo-dev
