Stephen Hahn wrote: > SolarisPackageDatastreamBundle.py: > > 123. Did you want to warn, or have some kind of > incomplete/nonsensible action or exception, here? (Or handle > None specially on 87, 106?)
You mean, specifically test "if act is not None:"? I'm not sure there's much of a reason for that -- it's a private interface, and the only value action() ever returns that evaluate to False is None. I'm pretty sure that a warning won't be terribly useful, except perhaps to admonish SVr4 package users (not necessarily even the developers) that they're using a feature of dubious utility. And I don't want to raise an exception outside the module, or generate an action that something further down the line might choke on. These lines really are ignorable. In the context of an import process which was doing dependency analysis, it could search for the directory in another package and emit a dependency, but that's outside the scope of this bug, and, IMHO, something that extremely few people would actually find useful. > I suppose we should have a P4 about unifying the pkgmap handling > between these two packages, if possible? (It looks possible. :) ) It is, I'm pretty sure; I'll file that bug. Danek _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
