[[!comment format=mdwn username="spwhitton" subject="comment 2" date="2016-05-22T01:48:27Z" content=""" Thanks for your feedback. > Re not running propellor in the sbuild chroot, I have in the past used > schroot for things where it would have made sense to run propellor in > the chroot. OTOH, systemd-container is a better fit for such uses > cases now, probably. I was thinking that if someone wanted to use a schroot and run propellor in it, useful properties could be appended to `Propellor.Property.Schroot`. As far as types go, I think that the types in `Propellor.Property.Chroot` would be sufficient. > Is the ~/.sbuildrc necessary to use the sbuild properties? If so, > would it make sense to have a property that configures it? The only probably which *needs* the suggested ~/.sbuildrc is `Sbuild.piupartsConfFor`. With the other properties and no ~/.sbuildrc, you should be able to go ahead and use sbuild(1) to perform a clean build. I don't think there is a way to write a non-intrusive property to add anything to a user's ~/.sbuildrc. That's because they will probably have different preferences for the options to pass to piuparts than I give in the example, and we would have to merge the adt-run code with any existing post-build-commands. I'm not sure propellor should have a perl config file parser. > You could use Utility.DataUnits for Ccache's MaxSize. This would be > more flexible and consistent with other things in propellor. Done. > Limit could be a monoid. This would perhaps simplify hasGroupCache as > it could only be used once to set multiple limits. Done. > Maybe instead of Ccache.hasGroupCache, call it Ccache.hasCache? Done, I think that's better. I was originally thinking that the name `Ccache.hasCache` might be for a property `User -> Property DebianLike`. However, if someone wanted to write a property configuring a user cache, it would probably have the standard location `~/.ccache`. This cache would be implicitly created when required, so the name `Ccache.hasCache` would be needed. > That is a weird build warning! But, I don't see it with ghc > 7.10.3. Normally you'd see that warning when the module's export list > exported the same symbol twice. I'm on GHC 7.10.3, too... """]]