On Sun, 10 Apr 2011 13:11:57 +0300, Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote: > On 2011-04-10 11:56, David Paleino wrote: > > Now, with that time spent, I suppose the objections against triggers would > > be fewer and less important. Am I wrong? :) > > I must say I'm a bit uncomfortable with APT-hooks, since the update script > > would then be run even for packages with no executable at all (lib*, > > python-*, and so on). So, I still prefer a file-trigger. > > Sure, using APT hooks is a hack (like Goswin said already). From the > time output above, I see it's now much faster than the man-db trigger? If > so, I would say go ahead with file triggers.
Seems so. I still need to test it thoroughly, but I'm confident the time spent won't vary too much. :) David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 ----|---- http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
