Gentoo Logo
Gentoo Spaceship

Installation:
Gentoo Handbook
Installation Docs

Documentation:
Home
Listing
About Gentoo
Philosophy
Social Contract

Resources:
Bug Tracker
Developer List
Discussion Forums
Gentoo BitTorrents
Gentoo Linux Enhancement Proposals
IRC Channels
Mailing Lists
Mirrors
Name and Logo Guidelines
Online Package Database
Security Announcements
Staffing Needs
Supporting Vendors
View our CVS

Graphics:
Logos and themes
Icons
ScreenShots

Miscellaneous Resources:
Gentoo Linux Store
Gentoo-hosted projects
IBM dW/Intel article archive




List Archive: gentoo-dev
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Headers:
To: Gentoo Dev <gentoo-dev@g.o>
From: Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o>
Subject: [RFC] PROPERTIES=interactive (narrower definition)
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2008 16:19:51 -0700
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi everyone,

It seems that it will be beneficial to narrow the definition of the
proposed PROPERTIES=interactive [1] value, so the definition is more
pure and simple like ones recently suggested for "live" [2] and
"virtual" [3] properties. Therefore, the "interactive" property will
only serve to indicate that some unspecified form(s) of interaction
may occur at some unspecified time(s) during the execution of one or
more of the ebuild's standard phase functions that are supposed to
be executed in order to build, install, or remove a package. In
order to keep the definition as narrow as possible, the method and
time of interaction are unspecified.

The "interactive" property will be useful in cases when it might not
be possible to perform interaction with ebuilds, so the user might
decide to mask any ebuilds that exhibit this property. It can also
be used to know in advance that it might not be safe to excecute
ebuild phases in the background, which might be used to provide a
solution for bug #233296 [4] by allowing exclusive access to stdio
to be guaranteed when executing the phases of a specific ebuild.

We might also consider adding finer grained values of PROPERTIES
such as interactive-setup, interactive-unpack, and
interactive-preinst. However, the "interactive" property alone will
still be quite useful whether or not we decide to create
finer-grained properties to represent more specific types of
interaction.

Do the name and definition of this PROPERTIES=interactive value seem
good? Would anybody like to discuss any changes to the name,
definition, or both?

[1]
http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_e145fc04e907de72e30d88285afb134c.xml
[2]
http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_64b83155637bcad67478e2d2af276780.xml
[3]
http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_9d449a18a96a25a547fcfd40544085cf.xml
[4] http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=233296
- --
Thanks,
Zac
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkix7JUACgkQ/ejvha5XGaNMrwCfaKyZvHJohJhqqN+IIi2aEwhP
+PAAoL3bA7rgaE1ygu9HQpiIgnHeL1W5
=18ah
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Previous by thread:
[RFC] PROPERTIES=virtual for meta-packages (clarification of definition)
Next by thread:
Automated Package Removal and Addition Tracker, for the week ending 2008-08-24 23h59 UTC
Previous by date:
Re: bugzilla unscheduled downtime
Next by date:
Automated Package Removal and Addition Tracker, for the week ending 2008-08-24 23h59 UTC


Updated Jun 17, 2009

Donate to support our development efforts.

Gentoo Centric Hosting: vr.org

VR Hosted

Tek Alchemy

Tek Alchemy

SevenL.net

SevenL.net

php|architect

php|architect

Copyright 2001-2007 Gentoo Foundation, Inc. Questions, Comments? Email www@gentoo.org.