| 1 |
On Wed, 10 Jan 2007 14:00:42 -0500 |
| 2 |
Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On Wednesday 10 January 2007 13:45, Jakub Moc wrote: |
| 5 |
> > Real solution, sure... RESTRICT=sandbox is not a solution, it's |
| 6 |
> > identical to the current hackish workaround, so I guess we can save |
| 7 |
> > portage folks the trouble... |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> except that RESTRICT is the documented method for disabling user |
| 10 |
> FEATURES in ebuilds ... it works for pretty much every FEATURE except |
| 11 |
> some -mike |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Ok, before this myth gets stuck any more: |
| 14 |
FEATURES and RESTRICT are two independent entities. That *some* FEATURES |
| 15 |
have a matching RESTRICT value is more a coincidence that a design |
| 16 |
pattern. Also RESTRICT handles some things that have no matching entry |
| 17 |
in FEATURES (like the infamous RESTRICT=fetch for example) or have a |
| 18 |
different meaning than their matching FEATURES value (e.g. |
| 19 |
RESTRICT=mirror has nothing in common with FEATURES=mirror). |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Marius |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
PS: this isn't an argument for or against the original proposal. |
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives