On Fri, Mar 03, 2006 at 02:54:50PM -0500, Ryan Frantz wrote:
> Perhaps exit codes should be more defined. For example, '0' would
> always be absolute success (all packages installed successfully).
>
> 1 = One or more packages failed to install dependencies
> 2 = One or more packages are already installed
> 4 = All selected packages failed
> ...
I think this is indeed the way to go. Several notes:
1) it doesn't need to be perfect. The idea is to provide something
useful to people that need a quick-and-dirty. We have a full
python interface if folks need more.
2) there's not a lot of room for feedback. If you go the bitmask
route, there are 16 bits? I suggest leaving a few for "general"
feedback and the rest for specific feedback. For example:
1 - warnings, but not necessarily error (this to be determined
by seth unilaterally or after some discussion)
2 - some sort of error (same)
4 - package(s) already installed (also 1)
8 - requested package could not be installed (also 2)
etc
3) another approach would be to not use bitmasks but specific codes
1 - unspecified error
2 - unspecified warning
3 - packages already installed
4 - package could not be installed
etc
You get more room with this approach, but you can't combine.
Anyway, my main point is that 0 should mean nothing wacky happened
(again, just make the call to serve as many people as possible... the
rest will just have to cope), provide specific feedback for a few
common cases and provide general feedback for the rest. That'll meet
the needs of 95% of the people who want this. The rest will have to
suck it up. That's what they have to do now.
-Michael
--
Michael D. Stenner mstenner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
ECE Department and Optical Sciences Center 520-626-1619
University of Arizona ECE 524G
