| 1 |
Zac Medico wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 4 |
>> On Tue, 05 Aug 2008 22:15:11 -0700 |
| 5 |
>> Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o> wrote: |
| 6 |
>>> Does this seem like a desirable way to represent the "virtual" |
| 7 |
>>> attribute? Any suggestions? |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
>> Again, I'm not so sure that this doesn't represent multiple separable |
| 10 |
>> concepts. It seems to imply: |
| 11 |
>> |
| 12 |
>> * that the install cost is effectively zero |
| 13 |
>> * that the resolution cost is effectively zero |
| 14 |
>> * that the package does not install any files |
| 15 |
>> * that the package does not use any of the (normal?) ebuild phases, and |
| 16 |
>> so does not require exclusive pkg_* execution or pkg_* system state |
| 17 |
>> preservation. |
| 18 |
>> |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> Can't we just treat them like other ebuilds except for the thing |
| 21 |
> about dependencies? Perhaps more fine-grained attributes could be |
| 22 |
> added for additional specificity. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
Sounds good. Keep existing keyword working how it is, and add new ones |
| 25 |
after. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
I'd vote for free-{resolve,install} empty and threadable for the other |
| 28 |
concepts. |
Archives