Shawn Walker wrote:
> [snip]
>>>>
>>>>> Why is it that we're testing properties against "none" versus just 
>>>>> being
>>>>> set to the empty string?  It seems like it will work, but I don't 
>>>>> really
>>>>> get the idiom.
>>>>>   
>>>> I went with none because it was the default/empty value for several 
>>>> properties already. I'm much happier with checking the empty 
>>>> string, but 'none' seemed to be the consensus in the manifest. I'll 
>>>> change it and the manifest to use empty strings instead of none and 
>>>> see if there are problems or complaints about it.
>>>
>>> This was done on purpose.
>>>
>>> My reasoning was as follows:
>>>
>>> --log-access and --log-errors have three special values each 
>>> indicating logging destination *explicitly* (stderr, stdout, none) 
>>> and anything else is assumed to be a filename if present.
>>>
>>> An empty string creates ambiguity in the command-line parsing for 
>>> this reason:
>>>
>>> ./depot.py --log-access= --readonly
>>> ./depot.py --log-access --readonly
>>>
>>> ...while I know that this is a side-affect of how long-options are 
>>> parsed, it's also very annoying to me.
>>>
>>> As such, I would avoid "empty string" for the reason above and 
>>> change --proxy-base instead to allow a value of "none" in depot.py 
>>> for the same reason it's done for the logging parameters if you must 
>>> change it.
>>>
>>> Danek and I recently discussed this topic in this thread:
>>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/pkg-discuss/2008-October/007257.html 
>>>
>>>
>>> I strongly prefer having an explicit destination value of "none" for 
>>> the logging commands over just using an empty string since that is 
>>> consistent with the other options of "stdout" and "stderr".
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>> Well, the nice thing about using this ksh script is that now the 
>> depot never sees --log-access= or --log-access. If the option isn't 
>> set, the flag never appears at all.
>
> Right, but I was trying to keep the SMF usage scenario consistent with 
> the "user using this from the command-line case" scenario.
>
> However, if this change is only going to affect the SMF scenario, I 
> have no strong objections.
>
> Cheers,

To me, this means the SMF use is more consistent with the command line 
since I think most users would omit a flag, rather than setting it to 
none explicitly. Since we've converged though, I suppose the details 
don't matter much.

Brock
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss

Reply via email to