| 1 |
On Wed, 10 Jan 2007 22:30:32 -0800 |
| 2 |
Ned Ludd <solar@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On Thu, 2007-01-11 at 17:37 +1300, Kent Fredric wrote: |
| 5 |
> > On 1/11/07, Marius Mauch <genone@g.o> wrote: |
| 6 |
> > |
| 7 |
> > > And I assume there is a non-trivial number of custom scripts out |
| 8 |
> > > there using make.profile, but that's nothing we can do about. |
| 9 |
> > > |
| 10 |
> > |
| 11 |
> > You could give them all a grace period for which have to comply with |
| 12 |
> > the new standard by then end of it, and have ( during that grace |
| 13 |
> > period ) an automatic symlink generation based on that make.conf |
| 14 |
> > flag. |
| 15 |
> > |
| 16 |
> > And just to make sure, I doubt it would be too difficult to have an |
| 17 |
> > application that analyises packages as they install to check whether |
| 18 |
> > they reference make.profile or not, and flag a QA warning if they |
| 19 |
> > do. |
| 20 |
> > |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> > And packages that don't switch to the standard by the end of the |
| 25 |
> > grace period I guess we'll see on a "last rites" bulletin ;) |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> Or we/gentoo could just support it and stop breaking the end user. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
A simple expedient would be to have the package manager re-create the |
| 30 |
symlink according to the variable, whenever it is run. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
Kevin F. Quinn |
Archives