On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 01:09:02AM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2012/05/01 01:37, Matthias Kilian wrote:
> > I'm using it for updates (after make update-plist) and even for new
> > hs-ports (after make plist) to get the @exec/@unexec lines in place.
[...]
> might be considered overkill, but I think it would be rather nice if
> we could have little fragments on a per-port or per-module basis that
> update-plist can use to adjust plists like this, put files matching
> certain patterns into certain subpackages, etc.
If it helps espie@ not to add too much heuristics to make-plist and
update-plist, and if there are enough ports too complicated to deal
with in a generic way, this would be a good idea.
For the special case of hs-ports, I'm working (very slowly) on a
tool for checking/updating/creating them, so in the long term there's
no need for extra-magic in update-plist and make-plist.
Ciao,
Kili
