From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18465 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2004 06:09:16 +0000 Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (156.56.111.197) by lists.gentoo.org with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 13 Nov 2004 06:09:16 +0000 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([156.56.111.196] helo=parrot.gentoo.org) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.41) id 1CSr64-0002Lt-Kz for arch-gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Sat, 13 Nov 2004 06:09:16 +0000 Received: (qmail 14519 invoked by uid 89); 13 Nov 2004 06:09:16 +0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 8474 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2004 06:09:15 +0000 From: Matthew Kenendy To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <20041112153025.GB452@time.flatmonk.org> References: <20041111234522.40d8f48d@snowdrop.home> <419451F6.1010202@gentoo.org> <20041112070757.GA21178@tiger.gg3.net> <1100225464.8750.2.camel@localhost> <4194A18E.30106@gentoo.org> <20041112153025.GB452@time.flatmonk.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 00:08:37 -0600 Message-Id: <1100326117.27444.22.camel@camus.fmakunbound.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] einfo / ewarn banners and die messages X-Archives-Salt: 32ef6ef2-2de3-4e14-b3f1-aa23c8684b55 X-Archives-Hash: b122e938acef754e4e8052148d586d9a On Fri, 2004-11-12 at 10:30 -0500, Aron Griffis wrote: > Aaron Walker wrote: [Fri Nov 12 2004, 06:42:06AM EST] > > Firstly, new* shouldn't need to die since they just cp and call their do* > > counterpart, iirc. > > except that we'd want to see the correct die message. > - When calling the aforementioned commands in ebuilds, there is never > a situation when a failure is expected. If ever a command fails, > the correct action is to die. Since that is the case, there is no > reason to put all the error-handling code in the ebuilds themselves. > It's just a burden on ebuild writers, and instead the errors often > get ignored. I don't think the absence of some "installables" (ie. the args to doins and co.) warrants a fatal error. Especially if you want the semantics of a doins installing "any of the following arguments given to it". If you really have to, just print out some diagnostic in red. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list