From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 (2022-12-14) on finch.gentoo.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=DMARC_MISSING, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,RDNS_DYNAMIC autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=4.0.0 Received: from brazil.sys.kcco.com (leg-66-247-92-2-CHI.sprinthome.com [66.247.92.2]) by chiba.3jane.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82A07AC421 for ; Mon, 29 Jul 2002 08:10:08 -0500 (CDT) Received: from brazil.sys.kcco.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by brazil.sys.kcco.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EB05C5BFE1; Mon, 29 Jul 2002 08:12:27 -0500 (CDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: Jean-Michel Smith To: Tom Philbrick , gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Automatic menus? Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 13:03:27 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.4.2 References: <20020724150806.GA5414@wickidpisa.csh.rit.edu> <20020726144505.195e1dd4.corvusvcorax@gemia.de> <20020726175337.GA8002@wickidpisa.csh.rit.edu> In-Reply-To: <20020726175337.GA8002@wickidpisa.csh.rit.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <200207261303.27485.jsmith@kcco.com> Sender: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org Errors-To: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.6 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Gentoo Linux developer list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: X-Archives-Salt: 2d177a5d-b7a7-42bf-8241-a240ec4765f4 X-Archives-Hash: c2ecc5bdde3b9c1dd2939a391a9cfa95 On Friday 26 July 2002 12:53 pm, Tom Philbrick wrote: > On Fri, Jul 26, 2002 at 02:45:05PM +0200, Corvus Corax wrote: > > Dont want to bother anyone, but the idea of having to rebuild every > > ebuild existing for menu data seems not very effective. > > It would not be very effective, which is why no one, including myself, > has suggested it. The way this would wor [sic] is, there is a program c= alled > update-menus that should be called in the ebuild of any program that > installs a menufile. It is a tough call where to draw the line of responsiblity. Do you make=20 ebuild maintainers do the work in their ebuild, in which case only those=20 whose maintainers have any interest in such a feature will use the featur= e,=20 and the rest will be left out anyway, or do you have an ebuild that maint= ains=20 such files for all the rest of the ebuilds, that a person who is interest= ed=20 in the feature can maintain across a bunch of packages (e.g.=20 update-menu-configs)? I think the best solution is one that allows ebuild maintainers to add th= e=20 information for their ebuild if they wish, but also allows other interest= ed=20 parties to add information for ebuilds whose maintainers do not have the = time=20 or interest to maintain that sort of information themselves. Soemthing like: #1 an optional ebuild that installs the auto-menu system #2 an ebuild containing menu information/config info for a plethora of eb= uilds=20 out there. #3 a documented means by which individual ebuilds can overlay/override th= e=20 config file in #2 above, or an easy way for ebuild maintainers to submit=20 changes/updates to #2 above. In any event, as long as the feature is optional and not required I have = no=20 problem with it, though I'm not certain I would use it (I might, though. = I=20 was ambivelent with Debian's menu system ... sometimes I liked it, someti= mes=20 I found it overly convoluted and annoying). Jean.