Re: [PATCH 1/2] build: union: Add create-all-directory? parameter to union-build

[Huang\, Ying]

Danny Milosavljevic <address@hidden> writes:

> Hi,
>
> yeah, I've looked at it and I see what you are trying to do.
>
> You modified 'union to replicate the directory tree and symlink only the 
> non-directory files - in order to be able to add "fonts.dir" in those 
> directories.
>
> The previous version symlinked entire directories, too, and you wouldn't have 
> been able to add those "fonts.dir" files inside them later.
>
> Your fix seems kinda hacky - but I don't really see a downside.
>
> Thinking about it some more I think it looks good enough to me. I'd like a 
> second opinion, though.
>
> Other than that, the name of the new flag "create-all-directory?" is weird. 
> I'd like it to be something like "create-all-directories?".
>
> (The non-hacky solution would be to make 'union aware that there are
> "fonts.dir" files to go in there, too. One could do that by adding
> these as an input, too. I'm not sure whether that would be worth the
> added complexity, though - especially since the fonts.dir generator
> needs to have the finished union as input and not just single
> directories one by one. Thoughts?)

union will only be called with create-all-directory? != nil for packages
have share/fonts directories.  And for these packages, we plan to remove
the fonts.dir and fonts.scale files, so that we need to create all
directories for them after all.  Is this good enough?

Best Regards,
Huang, Ying