A quick update...
On Thu, 7 Apr 2011 15:16:20 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
The trigger is going to happen very often (like the man-db one) and
with a 10s impact it's very noticable...
I think the time spent was the major objection, so I stripped it down to...
$ time ./update-bash-completion
On 2011-04-10 11:56, David Paleino wrote:
I think the time spent was the major objection, so I stripped it down to...
$ time ./update-bash-completion
bash-completion: updating completion symlinks... done.
real 0m0.225s
user 0m0.148s
sys 0m0.020s
$
Very good!
Now, with that time
On Sun, 10 Apr 2011 13:11:57 +0300, Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote:
On 2011-04-10 11:56, David Paleino wrote:
Now, with that time spent, I suppose the objections against triggers would
be fewer and less important. Am I wrong? :)
I must say I'm a bit uncomfortable with APT-hooks, since the
Hi,
David Paleino da...@debian.org writes:
I've implemented a new revision of bash-completion, which uses debtriggers(5)
to load only relevant completions, and symlink them when something
touches /usr/bin/, /usr/games/, /usr/sbin/, /sbin/, /bin/, and so on.
zsh supports autoloading of
On Sun, 10 Apr 2011 12:24:11 +0200, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
David Paleino da...@debian.org writes:
I've implemented a new revision of bash-completion, which uses
debtriggers(5) to load only relevant completions, and symlink them when
something touches /usr/bin/, /usr/games/, /usr/sbin/,
Le dimanche 10 avril 2011 à 12:54 +0200, David Paleino a écrit :
Also, we're currently targetting bash = 3.2, so we need to take care of
backwards compatibility.
For 2.0, we're probably bumping that requirement to = 4.1, so we can use
newer
bash features, which will hopefully make things
On Sun, 10 Apr 2011 14:55:12 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le dimanche 10 avril 2011 à 12:54 +0200, David Paleino a écrit :
Also, we're currently targetting bash = 3.2, so we need to take care of
backwards compatibility.
For 2.0, we're probably bumping that requirement to = 4.1, so we
On Sun, 10 Apr 2011 15:25:09 +0200, David Paleino wrote:
On Sun, 10 Apr 2011 14:55:12 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le dimanche 10 avril 2011 à 12:54 +0200, David Paleino a écrit :
Also, we're currently targetting bash = 3.2, so we need to take care of
backwards compatibility.
For
Eugene V. Lyubimkin jac...@debian.org writes:
On 2011-04-07 18:15, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Dpkg::Post-Invoke would be the right (best available) one. That would
call your trigger after every dpkg invocation [...]
This is not true, 'Dpkg::*-Invoke' script chain are called once
-completion using triggers to watch the
aforementioned directories?
I have a package ready, and would upload it to experimental before going
to unstable.
Kindly,
David
--
. ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino
: :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net
Hello Goswin,
re-putting debian-devel in the loop, since I believe you forgot it.
On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 12:20:34 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
David Paleino da...@debian.org writes:
Hello everybody,
I've implemented a new revision of bash-completion, which uses
debtriggers(5) to load
loading
seems much faster too.
Is there any objection to bash-completion using triggers to watch the
aforementioned directories?
I feel uneasy about this. It means the trigger is going to be activated
for any package installation and all packages are going to be put in
triggers-awaited state
on the installed packages -- on my
system, it takes about 10s -- but the shell loading seems much faster too.
Is there any objection to bash-completion using triggers to watch the
aforementioned directories?
I feel uneasy about this. It means the trigger is going to be activated
for any
David Paleino da...@debian.org writes:
On Thu, 7 Apr 2011 15:16:20 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
You'd better use some apt hook to do the task you envision. A file
trigger that is activated for a majority of package installation is
probably better dealt with such a solution.
Which hook
On 2011-04-07 18:15, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Dpkg::Post-Invoke would be the right (best available) one. That would
call your trigger after every dpkg invocation [...]
This is not true, 'Dpkg::*-Invoke' script chain are called once
before/after all dpkg invocations.
But those hooks would
On Thu, 07 Apr 2011, David Paleino wrote:
Only those installing executables in these directories:
I know, I do not have stats but I expect this to be a very important
percentage of packages.
Unfortunately, I have to remove and re-create all the symlinks upon trigger
activation: in fact, only
On Thu, 7 Apr 2011 22:14:31 +0300, Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote:
On 2011-04-07 18:15, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Dpkg::Post-Invoke would be the right (best available) one. That would
call your trigger after every dpkg invocation [...]
This is not true, 'Dpkg::*-Invoke' script chain are
On 2011-04-07 21:19, David Paleino wrote:
This is not true, 'Dpkg::*-Invoke' script chain are called once
before/after all dpkg invocations.
So it's just like a trigger monitoring /? (without the implications of
triggers
in terms of sequence of operations)
No, I phrased it badly
On Thu, 07 Apr 2011, Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote:
On 2011-04-07 18:15, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Dpkg::Post-Invoke would be the right (best available) one. That would
call your trigger after every dpkg invocation [...]
This is not true, 'Dpkg::*-Invoke' script chain are called once
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 21:19, David Paleino da...@debian.org wrote:
On Thu, 7 Apr 2011 22:14:31 +0300, Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote:
On 2011-04-07 18:15, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Dpkg::Post-Invoke would be the right (best available) one. That would
call your trigger after every dpkg
20 matches
Mail list logo
