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@g.o
From: "Arun Raghavan" <arunisgod@...>
Subject: Re: die/QA notice for do* failure?
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2008 20:48:41 +0530
On Sun, Jun 8, 2008 at 8:29 PM, Ciaran McCreesh
<ciaran.mccreesh@...> wrote:
[...]
> This isn't as simple as you think, since quite a few of these utilities
> are called using 'xargs' and so have to be binaries. Whilst Paludis can
> deal with external binaries triggering a die because exheres needs it
> (exheres has everything as fatal except where preceeded by 'nonfatal'),
> I'm not sure that Portage can just now.

I didn't understand you. Even if the external binary can't call die,
what's to prevent the caller from dying based on the return value of
the called binary?

> Also note that quite a few packages rely upon the current nonfatal
> behaviour, so it'd need to be an EAPI bump...

It should not be necessary to define a new EAPI to make sure packages
are not broken. If there really are a lot of packages that rely on the
current behaviour, we can easily implement this in a phased manner:
make it a QA notice to start with and make it default behaviour after
3-6 months or whatever time period is suitable.

BTW, do you have any examples of packages relying on non-fatal
behaviour for do* stuff? It'd be interesting to see why it might be
necessary.

Regards,
-- 
Arun Raghavan
(http://nemesis.accosted.net)
v2sw5Chw4+5ln4pr6$OFck2ma4+9u8w3+1!m?l7+9GSCKi056
e6+9i4b8/9HTAen4+5g4/8APa2Xs8r1/2p5-8 hackerkey.com
-- 
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list


Replies:
Re: die/QA notice for do* failure?
-- Ciaran McCreesh
References:
die/QA notice for do* failure?
-- Arun Raghavan
Re: die/QA notice for do* failure?
-- Ciaran McCreesh
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Previous by thread:
Re: die/QA notice for do* failure?
Next by thread:
Re: die/QA notice for do* failure?
Previous by date:
Re: A few questions to our nominees
Next by date:
Re: die/QA notice for do* failure?


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.