[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: --test and --repackage...



On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 09:20:58PM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Jan 2003, Jeff Johnson wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 01:21:59PM -0500, James Olin Oden wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > Any fix will be to remove --test, which is pretty useless for
> > > > anthing but checking for rpm segfaults.
> > > >
> > > Don't do that please.  Its actually quite usefull for finding out what 
> > > RPM would do.  Unless of course you want to add some option for showing
> > > what RPM would do package wise and transaction wise, but that probably 
> > > translates to asking it to fry your eggs over easy (-;
> > 
> > Curiosity:
> > 	What do you find useful about --test?
> > 
> > I think --test is silly, traversing all rpm code paths but doing nothing.
> > 
> > As a developer traversing all code paths is a feature, but for the life of
> > me I cannot see or imagine any use of --test that could not be better
> > provided through other means.
> 
> I occasionally use it for finding out what a given package depends on, 
> simply because 'rpm -e --test foo' is faster to type than 
> 'rpm -q --whatrequires `rpm -q --provides foo`|sort -u' 

Hmmm, this is a candidate for 
	Worst abuse of a command line option.

Admittedly, "-q --whatrequires" are not exactly easy, pleasant, or sufficiently
informative to use instead.

73 de Jeff

-- 
Jeff Johnson	ARS N3NPQ
jbj@redhat.com (jbj@jbj.org)
Chapel Hill, NC





[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index] []