Danek Duvall wrote:
On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 08:14:23PM -0700, Brock Pytlik wrote:
I'll be honest, I don't know what the right solution is here. For this put
back, I think mimicking existing behavior is an adequate goal.
Stepping back for a larger picture, I'm not sure what the final goal is.
searching for `whence ls` is nice idea in theory, but has some large
problems. [ ... ]
Yup, which is why I'd started to put down "you should fix 1059 while you're
here" and then thought about it long enough to realize that wasn't fair. I
just brought it up here because it was similarly not clear whether sticking
with "/" or using os.path.sep would be better, and wanted to be sure you
thought the issue through before committing to the switch.
Danek
I will give it some thought. Part of the problem is that the interaction
between category hierarchies and file paths could be troubling. Suppose
there's a category of /fun/games, and a user creates a user image in
/fun. If they do a search for /fun/games, are they looking for things in
the /fun/games directiory (in which case I should strip the leading
/fun) or are they looking for things with the /fun/games category. Since
we have OR now, it's possible to search for both, but with wildcarding,
we could easily end up duplicating results. The question for me for this
putback is whether we want /usr/bin/ls or usr/bin/ls to match, since we
can only have one (for now, at least that I can think of at the moment).
I lean towards having the former work, which then means what do we want
to do on windows. Should they search for \usr/bin/ls or /usr/bin/ls, and
regardless of OS, are any of those sane choices for items installed in
user images.
I've CC'd Tom to get his thoughts on what behavior is desired on Windows.
In general, we've been optimizing for the system/root image, and I think
that's still the right choice to make for now.
Brock
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
