I didn't explicitly say so, but I was implying that the install phase
should have a dependency for a succesful build, much like the usual
But I didn't take a look at the code yet, so I don't know if this is
possible. So I guess I'm the only one in this discussion who has no
idea how scsh-install-pkg really works. I'm going to look at the code
later this evening (probably).
Michel Schinz <Michel.Schinz@epfl.ch> writes:
> (Just to be clear, there is currently *no* distinction between a
> "build" and an "install" phase in package definitions. There's a
> single function whose aim is to do whatever has to be done in order
> for the package to be installed, and this is it. Sometimes this
> implies a compilation, sometimes not.)
So separating build and install phases would only affect those
packages where some kind of compilation has to be done.
I also think that doing nothing (or some output like "There is no
build phase for this package." + succesful exit value) is a graceful
degradation in this case and also for older packages.
I'm not asking you to update every possible package, just to give
package authors the opportunity to separate the build and install
phase, if they want to. Then I'll go bugging the package authors to
add a separate build phase (if applicable) :-)
'Let's settle this once and for all, shall we?' said Cohen. He stood
up. 'Hands up those who'd rather die than have me as Emperor.'
-- Terry Pratchett "Interesting Times"