Joined: July 2004
||Posted: June 09 2007,13:47
I totally agree. I know I have seen at least one application which for some reason got angry when it was missing an empty directory. I can't remembr if it failed to launch, or if it merely spit out some nasty words. But after second thoughts, it seems more logical to stick with simplicity. Declobber fully and without prejudice. If the package builder needs an empty directory for some dumb reason, she should create it at first runtime. Also, putting more emphasis on declobbering would probably be good, such as making it a requirement in the *.dsl and *.tar.gz extension-building process. Well, maybe not a requirement, but something like "If you don't know what declobbering does, you should probably run the script".
|How many extensions have non-base empty directories anyway that are actually supposed to be there and that do anything at all? One in 200? The vast majority shouldn't be there. So I erred on the side of caution. |