Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] New RESTRICT=live value for identification of live ebuilds?
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2008 21:52:03
Message-Id: 48962894.8060409@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] New RESTRICT=live value for identification of live ebuilds? by Joe Peterson
1 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
2 Hash: SHA1
3
4 Joe Peterson wrote:
5 > Yes, that's sort of what I am thinking. Migrate options that really do
6 > not belong in RESTRICT to another variable (and keep them in RESTRICT,
7 > of course, for backward compat for now). Then introduce new ones into
8 > whichever variable makes sense.
9
10 Personally I think people are far too concerned about the name of
11 the variable. I only see a what I consider to be a trivial or
12 negligible benefit in separating these things into two different
13 variables. However, it it makes more people happy then I guess I'm
14 for it.
15
16 Zac
17 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
18 Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)
19
20 iEYEARECAAYFAkiWKJMACgkQ/ejvha5XGaOtxwCdHWWJ9sFaVsSiQF36j1WDmJOY
21 Vf8AmgP9MlJGdQC5jzgGkjdUqmv+Y+F8
22 =WWt3
23 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Replies