Gentoo Archives: gentoo-doc

From: Joshua Saddler <nightmorph@g.o>
To: gentoo-doc@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-doc] Portage per-package environment/behavior
Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2012 18:54:53
Message-Id: 20120102105420.68c0d33a@angelstorm
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-doc] Portage per-package environment/behavior by Sven Vermeulen
On Sun, 1 Jan 2012 08:59:25 +0000
Sven Vermeulen <swift@g.o> wrote:

> On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 07:13:59PM -0800, Joshua Saddler wrote: > > per-package cflags has never been an officially supported portage > > feature. in fact, it's mostly been an env hack that users have > > been actively discouraged from using. they can expect to see bugs > > closed RESO WONTFIX when per-package cflag monkeying has been > > detected. as such, we shouldn't be documenting how to do it. > > I disagree. It is actively being suggested on #gentoo, and we > already document features that could (or even will) result in > RESO:WONTFIX, like using ~arch (both for a small set of packages as > well as the entire system).
and who's suggesting it on #gentoo? users? devs? we need to talk to the portage team and anyone else that would have to troubleshoot build fixes caused by (ab)using it. if we get the okay from them, then something like your proposed text should be added to the handbook.
> I would rather have a <warn> in place then that sais it will hinder > support during bug reports and might result in RESO:WONTFIX unless > the user removes the specific settings and rebuilds with the system > ones.

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-doc] Portage per-package environment/behavior Sven Vermeulen <swift@g.o>