From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.windriver.com (mail.windriver.com [147.11.1.11]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E45F6CD0E for ; Thu, 17 Oct 2013 10:28:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (ala-hca.corp.ad.wrs.com [147.11.189.40]) by mail.windriver.com (8.14.5/8.14.3) with ESMTP id r9HASE60017467 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Thu, 17 Oct 2013 03:28:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [128.224.162.145] (128.224.162.145) by ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (147.11.189.50) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.2.347.0; Thu, 17 Oct 2013 03:28:13 -0700 Message-ID: <525FBBBA.3000405@windriver.com> Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2013 18:28:10 +0800 From: Ming Liu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130330 Thunderbird/17.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Phil Blundell References: <1382004192-12678-1-git-send-email-ming.liu@windriver.com> <1382004192-12678-2-git-send-email-ming.liu@windriver.com> <1382004711.484.47.camel@phil-desktop.brightsign> In-Reply-To: <1382004711.484.47.camel@phil-desktop.brightsign> X-Originating-IP: [128.224.162.145] Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 2/2] screen: add pkg_postinst to register entry to /etc/shells X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2013 10:28:12 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 10/17/2013 06:11 PM, Phil Blundell wrote: > On Thu, 2013-10-17 at 18:03 +0800, Ming Liu wrote: >> +pkg_postinst_${PN} () { >> + touch $D${sysconfdir}/shells >> + grep -q "${bindir}/screen" $D${sysconfdir}/shells || echo ${bindir}/screen >> $D${sysconfdir}/shells >> +} > Is that "touch" really desirable? It seems as though screen ought not > really to be creating /etc/shells if it isn't there already, No, it's supposed to be created if /etc/shells doesn't exist already, otherwise, how could we echo text to it? > and > probably ought not to be updating the timestamp if it isn't actually > changing the file either. Yes, it may happen that the timestamp be updated even the it isn't actually changing the file, but only for upgrade case, and I think it's not a big deal. Actually I copied this piece of script from bash recipe, it's doing the same thing there. //Ming Liu > > p. > > >