| 1 |
* Alex Alexander schrieb am 22.07.11 um 13:30 Uhr: |
| 2 |
> On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 14:21, Marc Schiffbauer <mschiff@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Am Freitag, 22. Juli 2011, 14:50:06 schrieb Maxim Koltsov: |
| 4 |
> >> Hi devs, |
| 5 |
> >> I'm about to add Leechcraft modular internet client to tree. It has 32 |
| 6 |
> >> packages and uses it's own eclass. Please review it and allow me to |
| 7 |
> >> commit it to the tree. |
| 8 |
> >> Also i'd want to ask: is it woth to add new category (e.g. |
| 9 |
> >> leechcraft-plugins) to simplify managing leechcraft ebuilds. And the |
| 10 |
> >> last question: is it good to add 9999 versions for all ebuilds too? |
| 11 |
> > |
| 12 |
> > IMO live ebuilds should only be held in an overlay. |
| 13 |
> > |
| 14 |
> > -Marc |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> 9999 versions are nice, but they typically require more time and |
| 17 |
> effort to maintain. I'd recommend adding them only if you are willing |
| 18 |
> to do the work. Sometimes 9999 ebuilds are useful as a way to prepare |
| 19 |
> for the next release. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Yes, but the big drawback is that you do not have any checksums of |
| 22 |
the source. So if for example an upstream source code gets exploited you |
| 23 |
will never notice until the trojan or whatever got in there will do |
| 24 |
something. Sure this can happen with normal tarballs too, |
| 25 |
but is much more unlikely and can only happen if the source is |
| 26 |
already bad at the time of "repoman manifest". |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-Marc |
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
8AAC 5F46 83B4 DB70 8317 3723 296C 6CCA 35A6 4134 |
Archives