On Wednesday, 10 September 2008 at 20:42, Seth Vidal wrote: > On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 14:24 -0400, Doug Ledford wrote: > > On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 14:16 -0400, Seth Vidal wrote: > > > On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 14:14 -0400, Colin Walters wrote: > > > > On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 5:33 PM, Seth Vidal <skvidal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Here's a proof of concept plugin: > > > > > > > > > > http://skvidal.fedorapeople.org/misc/post-transaction-actions/ > > > > > > > > Ok cool - with one small fix to the plugin, this simple action: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you, I've applied this to the one I uploaded above. > > > > > > So this seems to work - now the question is - should we push for this to > > > go into rpm instead? > > > > Absolutely. If it's going to exist at all, it needs to be in rpm. > > Otherwise this and the corresponding rpm changes fail the litmus test of > > "will my system be the same if I download the rpm(2) and run the > > transaction manually using rpm as it is if I use yum to install the > > rpm". Any time you fail that litmus test, you've put the code in the > > wrong place (at least IMO). > > unless we bite the bullet and stop falling back on being able to do > everything from the rpm interface. -1 Fedora doesn't need to go where Suse already is. Regards, R. -- Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann Livna http://rpm.livna.org | MPlayer http://mplayerhq.hu "Faith manages." -- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations" -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
