From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 57EDB159C96 for ; Tue, 23 Jul 2024 10:56:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 520B1E29E0; Tue, 23 Jul 2024 10:56:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [IPv6:2001:470:ea4a:1:5054:ff:fec7:86e4]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EF7ADE29CF for ; Tue, 23 Jul 2024 10:56:05 +0000 (UTC) From: Ulrich Mueller To: Florian Schmaus Cc: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH v5] greadme.eclass: new eclass In-Reply-To: <06bee5df-0362-4112-b61e-419df181a562@gentoo.org> (Florian Schmaus's message of "Tue, 23 Jul 2024 10:15:27 +0200") References: <20240716092515.285042-1-flow@gentoo.org> <06bee5df-0362-4112-b61e-419df181a562@gentoo.org> Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2024 12:55:55 +0200 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: c5669d71-7640-4b46-827d-40e6c8cc69dd X-Archives-Hash: a7ace17b57d0de3641db430b38b6c86f --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain >>>>> On Tue, 23 Jul 2024, Florian Schmaus wrote: >> Having more than one element in REPLACING_VERSIONS is certainly a >> corner case, but I still wonder about the logic. Shouldn't it be >> the other way around, i.e. if there is _any_ empty ${_GREADME_SHOW} >> then there is an identical file installed that has been shown >> before, i.e. the file should _not_ be shown again? > I would argue the other way around: if there is a non-identical file > installed, then it should be shown. > But as you said, it's a corner case. I wouldn't worry about it until > we hit it and gained experience what the best behavior in this > situation is. Then we can change the code accordingly. WFM. --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQFDBAEBCAAtFiEEtDnZ1O9xIP68rzDbUYgzUIhBXi4FAmafjDsPHHVsbUBnZW50 b28ub3JnAAoJEFGIM1CIQV4u8BgIAI2H6eCISBxPfd3yqjVdZKNuU5AXDODHh1rw 3iuuPUlk4MY3Vqyveu03RXoiUiPTHQqt5RlNpz8XmUhd34yxr+q9tTQ8kJMK9vFi QfJ1c8sbCdovkTAncIdZue+4uEPXpTKlVkRvtvM74fitupyfC3yx4QGi+CVamqM1 KrqeGlyLO+ksFnEpCzp6tLP5LKpkK8La+5W1x/f+gzc/dA0K39DPzdm9HfAWBtG9 MrPIeCDXRJiUSgKDLc5en5is0nYnxYYs3XR6LY+kA1MMVseBprLyoOcEwy/RmLMH zDSNxlUkbQImsEoFUMf2dz5eeA8AN4sl+M5Nr0QEh60cSp9rqBI= =VWyr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--