"Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski" <[email protected]> writes: > No dia 1 de Janeiro de 2011 17:29, Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski > <[email protected]> escreveu: >> No dia 1 de Janeiro de 2011 14:00, Peter FELECAN >> <[email protected]> escreveu: >>> "Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski" <[email protected]> writes: >>> >>>> I agree that suggesting a gazillion unrelated looking packages might >>>> be confusing. We could stop doing that and only report missing base >>>> directories, but... if the right choice is to add a dependency, >>>> finding the right dependency by hand is a PITA. (Unless you know >>>> tricks such as "bin/pkgdb show filename /etc/opt/csw/init.d".) >>> >>> It's not a unknown trick if you give this exact information in your >>> message helping the maintainer to find his way. >> >> I still fiddle a lot with the interface of pkgdb, and I was a bit >> reluctant of revealing it to the world. This is a very good >> suggestion, how about the following patch? (...)
> Making it smarter however will require changing the database > interface; for example, each package name will need to be accompanied > by some file metadata, e.g. file type such as 'f', 'd', or 's'. I think that now is the time to put all the relevant information in the database. BTW, when dealing with package content having no information about their type is an evident gap. > To make checkpkg output more useful, we can try to apply some > heuristics, for example if one of the packages returned is CSWcommon, > we can suggest just CSWcommon and not any other packages. Hail to the heuristics! -- Peter _______________________________________________ maintainers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers .:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::.
