1 |
On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 20:23:10 +0100 |
2 |
Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> >>>>> On Fri, 27 Jan 2012, Ralph Sennhauser wrote: |
5 |
> |
6 |
> > Just recently Portage started to emit "* QA Notice: dosym target |
7 |
> > omits basename ..." for "dosym /path_to_file/file /some_other_path/" |
8 |
> |
9 |
> > The PMS says: |
10 |
> |
11 |
> > dosym: Creates a symbolic link named as for its second parameter, |
12 |
> > pointing to the first. If the directory containing the new link does |
13 |
> > not exist, creates it. Failure behaviour is EAPI dependent as per |
14 |
> > section 12.3.3.1. |
15 |
> |
16 |
> > The part "Creates a symbolic link named as for its second parameter" |
17 |
> > could qualify it for requiring a basename. |
18 |
> |
19 |
> Exactly. |
20 |
> |
21 |
> > As the behaviour of an implicit basename of the second parameter was |
22 |
> > used for a long time I wonder if the PMS needs to be updated and |
23 |
> > clarify the dosym behaviour or if this new QA warning can be seen as |
24 |
> > a long overdue implementation of the intended behaviour. |
25 |
> |
26 |
> This has been discussed in bug 379899 and the conclusion was that PMS |
27 |
> specifies the intended behaviour. |
28 |
> |
29 |
> At the moment a directory argument produces only a QA warning in |
30 |
> Portage. I think the long-term plan is to turn it into an error |
31 |
> though. |
32 |
> |
33 |
|
34 |
Thanks for the clarifications. |
35 |
|
36 |
Cheers |