On Jun 16, 2009, at 12:01 PM, Nicolas Williams wrote:
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 09:57:08AM -0700, Danek Duvall wrote:
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 11:39:37AM -0500, Nicolas Williams wrote:
Besides, I'm not sure if I really want to have "install -n[v]" be
parseable.
Huh?
If "pkg install -n" were to tell you that a reboot would be
required (as
Venky had mentioned earlier), then in order to use that in a
script, the
output of the command would need to be Committed, hence parseable
in some
form. If all you care about is human-readable messaging, then I
don't see
any problems with it.
A well-defined exit status code will do.
pkg install -n foo > $tmpfile 2>&1
case $? in
# Done!
0) : ;;
# Reboot required, tell the user/do whatever, try again
$IPS_REBOOT_REQD) ...;;
# Oops, something went wrong, show the user pkg's output, ...
*) ...;;
esac
For the same reasons we don't use exit codes to indicate specific
failure reasons, I'd rather not use them to indicate specific success
or actions.
I especially don't want to end up some day with a bitmap masked return
code :)
A formal, committed, parse-able output format is preferable to abusing
exit codes.
--
Shawn Walker
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
