On Tue, 2008-06-03 at 11:48 -1000, David Cantrell wrote: > On Jun 3, 2008, at 11:03 AM, Jeremy Katz wrote: > > So rhpl has over time turned into something of a dumping ground and > > we're really not using it for much any more. This probably means it's > > getting close to its time to go away (much like was done with > > pythonlib > > before). > > > > Left in anaconda[1] are really just a couple of uses of rhpl > > * rhpl.getArch() -- We mvoed this out of iutil, we could easily move > > it > > back > > I've never liked rhpl.getArch() and would really like to see it go > away completely. Uses of it in anaconda sort of hide what values you > are really testing for. When you rhpl.getArch() hands you 's390', > that really means s390 and s390x. And so on. I would prefer to > explicitly test os.uname(). That gets a little ugly, just due to the multitude of uname returns for i386. But it's definitely doable. > For issues that revolve around multilib > packages, could we put pressure on yum or rpm to provide a function we > can call to tell us what we should use? There really isn't anything to speak of like this left. If it's specifically yummy/rpm-y, we can use the yum versions of the methods. But we shouldn't import yum stuff outside of the yum-backend-specific bits > > * rhpl.simpleConfig -- I think this might be replaceable with > > python-iniparse but I haven't looked to make sure > > ConfigParser? Course, I don't know what rhpl.simpleConfig is used for > anyway. Might also work. It's just for the simple stupid key=value sysconfig files Jeremy _______________________________________________ Anaconda-devel-list mailing list Anaconda-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
