Re: Bash-completion with triggers
On 2011-04-10 11:56, David Paleino wrote:
> I think the time spent was the major objection, so I stripped it down to...
> $ time ./update-bash-completion
> bash-completion: updating completion symlinks... done.
> real 0m0.225s
> user 0m0.148s
> sys 0m0.020s
> Now, with that time spent, I suppose the objections against triggers would be
> fewer and less important. Am I wrong? :)
> I must say I'm a bit uncomfortable with APT-hooks, since the update script
> would then be run even for packages with no executable at all (lib*, python-*,
> and so on). So, I still prefer a file-trigger.
Sure, using APT hooks is a hack (like Goswin said already). From the
time output above, I see it's now much faster than the man-db trigger? If
so, I would say go ahead with file triggers.
Eugene V. Lyubimkin aka JackYF, JID: jackyf.devel(maildog)gmail.com
C++/Perl developer, Debian Developer