| 1 |
Sven <svoop@××××××××.ch> posted loom.20090513T143352-787@××××××××××.org, |
| 2 |
excerpted below, on Wed, 13 May 2009 14:34:20 +0000: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Yet meanwhile I'd love to get some feedback on my original proposition: |
| 5 |
> Is it feasable and acceptable to expand Portage by the possibility to |
| 6 |
> declare a file shared between slots and only delete it once the last |
| 7 |
> slot is uninstalled? |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
FWIW, that'd not be a portage issue per se, but an EAPI issue, since it |
| 10 |
would have to do with the ebuilds and the other PMs (package managers, |
| 11 |
Gentoo has three, portage, paludis, pkgcore, and anything that an ebuild |
| 12 |
can depend on must be in an approved EAPI, approval being conditioned on |
| 13 |
implementation in all three PMs) would need to deal with it also. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Granted, whether it can be added to an EAPI spec is to some degree |
| 16 |
dependent on whether portage (as well as the other PMs) can feasibly |
| 17 |
support it, but you'd need to go thru the EAPI process to do it, not |
| 18 |
simply add it to portage. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
-- |
| 21 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
| 22 |
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
| 23 |
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman |
Archives