[Feature request] make it possible to select which types of checks to do.

[dreirund]

This is a feature request to add command line arguments to do only specific checks (e.g. python and perl).

And then make specific pacman hooks per type of package that does then only the specific checks.

Rationale: The whole check takes really long, but specific checks like python or perl can be done without library linking checking but just installation directory checking, and wasting all the time in the pacman hook whenever just a python or perl package is installed is actually stopping me from using this package.

Regards!

[maximbaz]

Hello! Pacman hook actually takes the list of packages as parameter, so it doesn't check the entire system, so if you only update a single python package, it would presumably have no so files inside the package, and so it would anyway check only the python stuff. Do you have an example where it doesn't happen like this?

[dreirund]

According to manpage and `checkrebuild --help` it does not accept individual packages, just repositories: `checkrebuild --help`: ``` /usr/bin/checkrebuild: illegal option -- - Usage: /usr/bin/checkrebuild [-v] [-i repo1] [-i repo2] ```

[maximbaz]

This is an undocumented secret feature 😜

rebuild-detector/checkrebuild

Line 7 in 0fbc329

[ -t 0 ] || mapfile -t hook_targets

The list of packages is being passed by pacman itself on stdin, thanks to this line:

rebuild-detector/rebuild-detector.hook

Line 10 in 0fbc329

NeedsTargets

[dreirund]

This is an undocumented secret feature 😜 https://github.com/maximbaz/rebuild-detector/blob/0fbc3295af697f0f98d414f3a3010c679e60f6fc/checkrebuild#L7

Oh, I really like it on the command line, too. So I let this be a feature request: Document the feature properly :-).

[maximbaz]

You got it 👍 d9a762b

[dreirund]

Nice :-)

But it still is another feature than the requested one (which can be useful for manual runs).

Maybe it's time for a new release, so that the Arch Linux package can catch up? Arch package still uses the release from 2021, which also has the "Do not check for ruby executable" commit included.

Regards and many thanks for that package!

[maximbaz]

To be honest I don't see yet a practical need for disabling some of the checks, besides temporary tinkering around; and ldd one is probably the most useful one in practice... The hook allows you to not spend time on checking what definitely hasn't been impacted by the latest upgrade, but other than that, I'd be more interested in optimizing the check perf, rather than adding functionality to promote to leave half-broken systems be...

Do you see you practically disabling ldd checks? Could you describe the example, what would make you do it?

[dreirund]

Ahoj,

Do you see you practically disabling ldd checks? Could you describe the example, what would make you do it?

Manual system-wide checking for all python packages, e.g.

[maximbaz]

Thanks, I'd like to understand more - would I be correct to assume that such a manual check would be done once in a while, and not e.g. every minute? What would make you want to save a couple of seconds per "once in a while", and lose the knowledge about potentially other non-python packages being broken on your system?

[dreirund]

would I be correct to assume that such a manual check would be done once in a while, and not e.g. every minute?

Yes,

What would make you want to save a couple of seconds per "once in a while", and lose the knowledge about potentially other non-python packages being broken on your system?

Having command line options which can select the checks does not make me loose anything, but gives choice.

[maximbaz]

It increases the complexity in the project, which I'd like to avoid if there are no significant benefits to gain 😊

[curable-online]

Dude!! It's really not complexity! Your program doesn't even show me its version if I use --version or -V flag!😅 So I have to use pacman -Q rebuild-detector
I know that it doesn't have any significant gain! But does it really bring such a complexity to echo the version of a program?

[maximbaz]

This issue is not a feature request to add --version though 😉

[curable-online]

And that's totally true! It's as unnecessary, as no one will open a feature request for it.

[aminvakil]

@curable-online Please do not make a toxic environment, be demanding and make sarcastic comments.

If you think a feature is needed, please open an issue and someone will get to it (or not).

Please remind yourself this is an open-source project and maintainer was kind enough to share this with others and therefore you cannot demand features.

[curable-online]

Foremost, we are all living in the same community and environment and making contributions, Some identities hold it by themselves and some stay anonymous. Then, I don't see my conversation making the environment toxic. I wasn't demanding anything, after all.

Nevertheless, I apologise for any negative perception that I made in this page.
Regards