On Sun, 10 Apr 2011 15:25:09 +0200, David Paleino wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Apr 2011 14:55:12 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
>
> > Le dimanche 10 avril 2011 à 12:54 +0200, David Paleino a écrit :
> > > Also, we're currently targetting bash >= 3.2, so we need to take care of
> > > backwards compatibili
On Sun, 10 Apr 2011 14:55:12 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le dimanche 10 avril 2011 à 12:54 +0200, David Paleino a écrit :
> > Also, we're currently targetting bash >= 3.2, so we need to take care of
> > backwards compatibility.
> > For 2.0, we're probably bumping that requirement to >= 4.1,
Le dimanche 10 avril 2011 à 12:54 +0200, David Paleino a écrit :
> Also, we're currently targetting bash >= 3.2, so we need to take care of
> backwards compatibility.
> For 2.0, we're probably bumping that requirement to >= 4.1, so we can use
> newer
> bash features, which will hopefully make thi
On Sun, 10 Apr 2011 12:24:11 +0200, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> David Paleino writes:
> > I've implemented a new revision of bash-completion, which uses
> > debtriggers(5) to load only relevant completions, and symlink them when
> > something touches /usr/bin/, /usr/games/, /usr/sbin/, /sbin/, /bin
Hi,
David Paleino writes:
> I've implemented a new revision of bash-completion, which uses debtriggers(5)
> to load only relevant completions, and symlink them when something
> touches /usr/bin/, /usr/games/, /usr/sbin/, /sbin/, /bin/, and so on.
zsh supports autoloading of functions: the time i
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
On 2011-04-10 11:56, David Paleino wrote:
> I think the time spent was the major objection, so I stripped it down to...
>
> $ time ./update-bash-completion
> bash-completion: updating completion symlinks... done.
>
> real 0m0.225s
> user 0m0.148s
> sys 0m0.020s
> $
Very good!
> Now, with t
A quick update...
On Thu, 7 Apr 2011 15:16:20 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> The trigger is going to happen very often (like the man-db one) and
> with a 10s impact it's very noticable...
I think the time spent was the major objection, so I stripped it down to...
$ time ./update-bash-completio
"Eugene V. Lyubimkin" writes:
> On 2011-04-07 18:15, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> Dpkg::Post-Invoke would be the right (best available) one. That would
>> call your trigger after every dpkg invocation [...]
>
> This is not true, 'Dpkg::*-Invoke' script chain are called once
> before/after all d
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 21:19, David Paleino wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Apr 2011 22:14:31 +0300, Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote:
>
>> On 2011-04-07 18:15, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> > Dpkg::Post-Invoke would be the right (best available) one. That would
>> > call your trigger after every dpkg invocation [..
On Thu, 07 Apr 2011, Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote:
> On 2011-04-07 18:15, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> > Dpkg::Post-Invoke would be the right (best available) one. That would
> > call your trigger after every dpkg invocation [...]
>
> This is not true, 'Dpkg::*-Invoke' script chain are called once
>
On 2011-04-07 21:19, David Paleino wrote:
> > This is not true, 'Dpkg::*-Invoke' script chain are called once
> > before/after all dpkg invocations.
>
> So it's just like a trigger monitoring /? (without the implications of
> triggers
> in terms of sequence of operations)
No, I phrased it badly
On Thu, 7 Apr 2011 22:14:31 +0300, Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote:
> On 2011-04-07 18:15, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> > Dpkg::Post-Invoke would be the right (best available) one. That would
> > call your trigger after every dpkg invocation [...]
>
> This is not true, 'Dpkg::*-Invoke' script chain ar
On Thu, 07 Apr 2011, David Paleino wrote:
> "Only" those installing executables in these directories:
I know, I do not have stats but I expect this to be a very important
percentage of packages.
> Unfortunately, I have to remove and re-create all the symlinks upon trigger
> activation: in fact, o
On 2011-04-07 18:15, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Dpkg::Post-Invoke would be the right (best available) one. That would
> call your trigger after every dpkg invocation [...]
This is not true, 'Dpkg::*-Invoke' script chain are called once
before/after all dpkg invocations.
> But those hooks would
David Paleino writes:
> On Thu, 7 Apr 2011 15:16:20 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
>
>> You'd better use some apt hook to do the task you envision. A file
>> trigger that is activated for a majority of package installation is
>> probably better dealt with such a solution.
>
> Which hook would you
On Thu, 7 Apr 2011 15:16:20 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, 07 Apr 2011, David Paleino wrote:
> > Hello everybody,
> > I've implemented a new revision of bash-completion, which uses
> > debtriggers(5) to load only relevant completions, and symlink them when
> > something touches /
Hi,
On Thu, 07 Apr 2011, David Paleino wrote:
> Hello everybody,
> I've implemented a new revision of bash-completion, which uses debtriggers(5)
> to load only relevant completions, and symlink them when something
> touches /usr/bin/, /usr/games/, /usr/sbin/, /sbin/, /bin/, and so on.
>
> For thi
Hello Goswin,
re-putting debian-devel in the loop, since I believe you forgot it.
On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 12:20:34 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> David Paleino writes:
>
> > Hello everybody,
> > I've implemented a new revision of bash-completion, which uses
> > debtriggers(5) to load only rel
19 matches
Mail list logo
