| 1 |
>>>>> On Mon, 17 Apr 2017, James Le Cuirot wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> If you've been wondering why I've been quiet of late (you have, |
| 4 |
> right?!) then this is partly why. I'm not sure why I spent so long |
| 5 |
> on an eclass that hardly anyone uses but it's utilised by many of my |
| 6 |
> old favourite games. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
Wouldn't this be a good time to rethink the whole concept? By all our |
| 9 |
standards, ebuilds shouldn't be interactive. AFAICS, cdrom.eclass is |
| 10 |
the last remnant in the tree using PROPERTIES="interactive". |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Maybe the eclass could be replaced by a utility that extracts the ISO |
| 13 |
image and places it into DISTDIR, so that ebuilds could use regular |
| 14 |
non-interactive unpacking? The additional disk space used shouldn't be |
| 15 |
an argument any more with today's large disks. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Ulrich |
Archives