On Sunday 30 October 2005 15:29, Brian Harring wrote:
> So... pre/post for .53? Post sync is a late comer, and is strictly a
> feature, so that (imo) can sit till .54.
>
> if an rc7 is coming, I'd nudge strongly that pre/post should slide in
> alongside since it's non invasive, and allows the java
On Sun, Oct 30, 2005 at 03:18:45PM +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote:
> Ok, that works. Adding functionality that won't be supported long term even
> by
> an alternative method kind of worries me. ;)
Agreed.
So... pre/post for .53? Post sync is a late comer, and is strictly a
feature, so that (imo) c
On Sunday 30 October 2005 15:08, Brian Harring wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 30, 2005 at 02:47:51PM +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote:
> > > post sync has a limited shelf life; it's usable now for the following
> > > 1) rolling gensync functionality in
> > > 2) rolling glsa notices on sync in
> > > 3) rolling packa
On Sun, Oct 30, 2005 at 02:47:51PM +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote:
> > post sync has a limited shelf life; it's usable now for the following
> > 1) rolling gensync functionality in
> > 2) rolling glsa notices on sync in
> > 3) rolling package watch lists of updates in
> > 4) a method to trigger transfer
On Sunday 30 October 2005 14:27, Brian Harring wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 30, 2005 at 01:02:43PM +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote:
> > On Sunday 30 October 2005 09:32, Ned Ludd wrote:
> > > On Sun, 2005-10-30 at 03:15 +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote:
> > > > This really goes hand in hand with the pre/post phase hooks
On Sun, Oct 30, 2005 at 01:02:43PM +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote:
> On Sunday 30 October 2005 09:32, Ned Ludd wrote:
> > On Sun, 2005-10-30 at 03:15 +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote:
> > > This really goes hand in hand with the pre/post phase hooks patch. That
> > > patch, however, implements hooks as bash fu
On Sunday 30 October 2005 09:32, Ned Ludd wrote:
> On Sun, 2005-10-30 at 03:15 +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote:
> > This really goes hand in hand with the pre/post phase hooks patch. That
> > patch, however, implements hooks as bash functions rather than external
> > executables. The discrepancy there sh
On Sunday 30 October 2005 11:04, Ned Ludd wrote:
> updated patch that adds error checking and shifts when we exexve to the
> end patch
+ try:
+ portage.spawn(portage.USER_CONFIG_PATH +
"/bin/post_sync " + dosyncuri, portage.settings, free=1)
+
On Sat, 2005-10-29 at 20:32 -0400, Ned Ludd wrote:
> On Sun, 2005-10-30 at 03:15 +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote:
> > On Sunday 30 October 2005 01:03, Ned Ludd wrote:
> > > The following simple patch adds the ability for to run a userside
> > > post_sync script, right now it's only used with rsync but th
On Sun, 2005-10-30 at 03:15 +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote:
> On Sunday 30 October 2005 01:03, Ned Ludd wrote:
> > The following simple patch adds the ability for to run a userside
> > post_sync script, right now it's only used with rsync but the idea could
> > be adopted rather easy for other methods o
On Sunday 30 October 2005 01:03, Ned Ludd wrote:
> The following simple patch adds the ability for to run a userside
> post_sync script, right now it's only used with rsync but the idea could
> be adopted rather easy for other methods of transfer that portage may
> use. The basic idea is to be able
The following simple patch adds the ability for to run a userside
post_sync script, right now it's only used with rsync but the idea could
be adopted rather easy for other methods of transfer that portage may
use. The basic idea is to be able to preform a set of maintenance tasks
right after sync
12 matches
Mail list logo
