On Tue, 2 Feb 2016 21:06:14 -0500
Eli Schwartz <eschwartz93@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 02/02/2016 09:00 PM, Andrew Gregory wrote:
> > Neither hooks.bin nor hooks.local are used by alpm/pacman in any way.
> > They are merely my own personal suggestions for where packages should
> > put scripts and inactive hooks. The intent for hooks.local is for
> > packages to place any hooks that shouldn't be automatically enabled
> > there, then for users to selectively enable them by symlinking them
> > into /etc/pacman.d/hooks.
> >
> > apg
> >
>
> Duh... "inactive hooks for users to enable"
>
> I should have realized.
>
> Of course, three of those hooks are things that should (eventually) be
> replacing standard install scripts. So they should be going in
> /usr/share/libalpm/hooks/
>
> Speaking of which, does anyone know what plans there are for globally
> transitioning common actions like gtk-update-icon-cache,
> update-{mime,desktop}-database, vim helptags, install-info, etc. to hooks?
>
> Will these be part of pacman, or part of the packages that provide the
> executables they use?
>
So far, the thinking is that they would be part of the package that provides
the executable in most cases. I'm sure there would be exceptions, possibly with
icon themes or others. The details haven't been hashed out AFAIK.
