| 1 |
On Wed, 2009-07-15 at 16:43 +0100, Sérgio Almeida wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Tue, 2009-07-14 at 17:07 +0200, Michael Haubenwallner wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> > So it should be fine as long as 'symlink' can potentially be implemented |
| 5 |
> > as 'copy' for specific platforms. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
> ... can be easily replaced for copy. What should be the default? |
| 8 |
> Should uselect be able to supply both options like "uselect --copy bla |
| 9 |
> bla" overrides os.symlink to copy function? |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
Ideally it is transparent to the uselect-user (either end-user or |
| 12 |
developer) if the implementation actually does the symlink or emulates |
| 13 |
it via copy. |
| 14 |
It might be enough to select the implementation based on the |
| 15 |
"host-system" (CHOST), which may be different to the |
| 16 |
"build-system" (CBUILD). |
| 17 |
Eventually, uselect won't need to detect the CHOST itself, but get it |
| 18 |
from some external resource (cmdline, env-var, config-file, ...). |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
> Thanks for the hint! |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
nP. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
/haubi/ |
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
Michael Haubenwallner |
| 27 |
Gentoo on a different level |
Archives