On Mon, 2005-07-25 at 22:33 +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote: > On Monday 25 July 2005 22:09, Martin Schlemmer wrote: > > On Mon, 2005-07-25 at 20:53 +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote: > > > On Monday 25 July 2005 16:51, Martin Schlemmer wrote: > > > > Something like this maybe? (Yes, I know using $T will be frowned upon, > > > > but not much else you can do. Also, might use has_version(), but that > > > > is more difficult to parse, and I figured you normally only want those > > > > for system udev ...) > > > > > > Combining the pkg_preinst and pkg_postinst parts (and removing the usage > > > of $T ;), that pretty much shows exactly what the proposed pkg_warn would > > > look like. Only difference being that it would be executed before emerging > > > starts. > > > > Currently: > > - if everything is moved to pkg_preinst(), the message will not show at > > the end of the merge, so much higher chance of getting missed. > > - if everything is moved to pkg_postinst(), $udev_version will be the > > new version, and be of no use. > > - if you meant that this is for the pkg_warn() ... it still wont really > > help that much, as it will differ from before/after the update :/ > > What's the issue with pkg_warn? It would only be ran before the update, > so the ebuild it's in is the new version and the current version can be > obtained with has_version. >
Ah, ok, guess I should read more carefully next time =) -- Martin Schlemmer
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
