Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Arthur Zamarin <arthurzam@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o, mgorny@g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal to undeprecate EGO_SUM
Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2022 18:31:58
Message-Id: 17acb60d-4f13-fad9-702c-64cad71a3c05@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal to undeprecate EGO_SUM by William Hubbs
1 On 16/07/2022 20.51, William Hubbs wrote:
2 > On Sat, Jul 16, 2022 at 02:58:04PM +0300, Joonas Niilola wrote:
3 >> On 16.7.2022 14.24, Florian Schmaus wrote:
4 >>>
5 >>
6 >> ++ this sounds most sensible. This is also how I've understood your
7 >> proposal.
8 >
9 > Remember that with EGO_SUM all of the bloated manifests and ebuilds are
10 > on every user's system.
11 >
12 > I added mgorny as a cc to this message because he made it pretty clear
13 > at some point in the previous discussion that the size of these ebuilds
14 > and manifests is unacceptable.
15 >
16 > William
17
18 I want to give another option. Both ways are allowed by eclass, but by
19 QA policy (or some other decision), it is prohibited to use EGO_SUM in
20 main ::gentoo tree.
21
22 As a result, overlays and ::guru can use the EGO_SUM or dist distfile
23 (remember, they don't have access to hosting on dev.g.o).
24
25 --
26 Arthur Zamarin
27 arthurzam@g.o
28 Gentoo Linux developer (Python, Arch Teams, pkgcore stack, GURU)

Attachments

File name MIME type
OpenPGP_signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal to undeprecate EGO_SUM "Robin H. Johnson" <robbat2@g.o>