1 |
On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 11:29:05AM +1300, Kent Fredric wrote: |
2 |
> On Thu, 29 Sep 2016 23:56:34 +0200 |
3 |
> Andy Mender <andymenderunix@×××××.com> wrote: |
4 |
> |
5 |
> > I believe the main problem comes from /bin/bash and potential symlinks that |
6 |
> > would need to be introduced as part of the slotting. |
7 |
> |
8 |
> In a pinch you could probably get away with |
9 |
> calling :1 /usr/bin/bash-4.4 instead of /usr/bin/bash, and then |
10 |
> offering no luxuries beyond that, leaving it up to the user to do the rest. |
11 |
> |
12 |
> Then you could test it in ~/ with PATH + Symlink in ~/bin/ ... maybe. |
13 |
> |
14 |
> There would just not be much point, because the real purpose of testing |
15 |
> 4.4 is not for fear of it breaking user experience ( which is a |
16 |
> problem, but not the primary motive ), but for making everything else |
17 |
> that runs with bash runs OK. |
18 |
> |
19 |
> Maybe you could do some horrible QA Violation like USE=multislot |
20 |
> which changes the slot from :0 and adds the -suffix at the same time. |
21 |
> |
22 |
> But I still don't think its a useful or good idea. |
23 |
|
24 |
I am against it as well. The purpose of this testing is to eventually |
25 |
move to bash-4.4 being stable and replacing bash-4.3, so slotting it |
26 |
would make that more complex later. |
27 |
|
28 |
William |