| 1 |
On 12/27/2012 03:40 PM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: |
| 2 |
> Am Donnerstag, 27. Dezember 2012, 14:37:37 schrieb Michał Górny: |
| 3 |
>> |
| 4 |
>> a) adding new profiles which will require EAPI=5 and requiring all |
| 5 |
>> users to migrate to them after upgrading portage. Using new |
| 6 |
>> use.stable.mask files in those profiles. |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> OK here's one way how we could pull option a) through. After all we have some |
| 10 |
> sort of basic versioning present in the profiles (the 10.0 part that makes no |
| 11 |
> sense otherwise). |
| 12 |
> [Note: this does not cover prefix profiles, BSD and other oddities. Need |
| 13 |
> special treatment.] |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> 1) Define a new set of profiles by copying the current ones, and replacing the |
| 16 |
> 10.0 parent by a 13.0 parent. Only differences between 10.0 and 13.0: |
| 17 |
> * the EAPI, now 5, |
| 18 |
> * e.g. an additional parent profiles/base5 (for global stable mask files) |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> 2) Deprecate the 10.0 profiles NOW by removing them from profiles.desc and |
| 21 |
> putting the new 13.0 profiles there. This has absolutely no effect on running |
| 22 |
> installations. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
It's not strictly necessary to remove them from profiles.desc, since |
| 25 |
repoman ignores them if they have a 'deprecated' file, and emerge warns |
| 26 |
any users who have a deprecated profile selected. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
> 3) Make a news item about removal of 10.0 profiles in a year / ${TIMESCALE}. |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
> 4) One ${TIMESCALE} later, remove 10.0 profiles. This is the ugly part, and |
| 31 |
> users need to be warned and prepared properly - here everyone needs an EAPI5 |
| 32 |
> capable portage. |
| 33 |
> |
| 34 |
> 5) Since now all existing profiles require EAPI 5, move that requirement to |
| 35 |
> the profile root directory. |
| 36 |
> |
| 37 |
> Comments? |
| 38 |
> |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
Sounds good to me. |
| 41 |
-- |
| 42 |
Thanks, |
| 43 |
Zac |
Archives