On Thu, 2008-11-20 at 14:49 -0500, Colin Walters wrote: > > But there's clearly a default, which is shell script. And in > particular bash. In any case do we really want to encourage people > writing their %post scripts in lua or whatever random language they > like? I don't think we do. That will fragment the community of > people who can modify a package. Actually yes, lua would be a good forced default, since rpm contains an internal lua interpreter and would need no external deps to process the script. Of course, regardless of what /language/ the script is written in, the script could call upon things that are both "core os" utilities, as well as "applications". We have to account for both in the ordering, so why not just account for both, instead of trying to draw some fuzzy line in the sand? > > > The point is that the > > package installation system needs to know what your package needs before > > it's scripts can be ran. Trying to set some arbitrary level of "OS > > bits" and "applications" is doomed to fail. > > We have that in comps, in particular say everything in core/mandatory. > In the first phase, lay all that stuff down since it's not optional. > I'd be shocked if there weren't circular dependencies here that took > special handling in the installer anyways. Very very few things require special handling, rpm handles that for us. And yeah, you can assume that those things will be installed, but not in what order, which is why you have to give the system that installs the software ordering hints. > > > We have a system that > > handles the ordering for us, it just needs a few hints along the way. > > Yes, but the problem is that we're *introducing bugs* and wasting the > time of the people who are trying to package things higher up in the > stack. > > I wouldn't care at all about this if people wanted to mess around with > the core OS packages and add dependencies, but if I get a bug about > this in one of my packages it'll be 5 minutes down the drain that > could have been spent somewhere more useful. Or you could have done it right in the first place and we wouldn't be filing a bug against your package. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
