--24zk1gE8NUlDmwG9
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sat, Aug 13, 2005 at 09:08:05PM +0100, Matthias Scheler wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 13, 2005 at 03:33:33PM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
> > > Good idea. What about this:
> >=20
> > do you mean all 3, or choose 1?
>=20
> All 3.
>=20
> > for install, or refuses if the existence of the metalog and the -U
> > flag don't sense.  I'm a bit leery of making such decisions
> > automatically, but fine with failing if they are wrong.
>=20
> If it can reliably detect the error it can also avoid it.

The problem I see is that with a brand new destdir, there will be no=20
metalog. So we would move from using command-line arguements to having to=
=20
touch or not touch a file to get a behavior.

I think options 1 & 2 from the original list are great for installs. For=20
building, though, if you set -U, you should get an unprived build. Builds=
=20
w/o -U but with a metalog erroring out would be fine too.

Take care,

Bill

--24zk1gE8NUlDmwG9
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (NetBSD)

iD8DBQFDAPNQWz+3JHUci9cRAj9mAJ4wWECvzdk3ZDvWYS9BYYoAgMR0gwCcD3cI
gjZi5BCtIq00Mzl6REIvNMw=
=DkP9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--24zk1gE8NUlDmwG9--