Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Florian Schmaus <flow@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH v3 0/2] Add esed.eclass for modifying with checks for no-op
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2022 11:24:29
Message-Id: 401bfe57-d208-5a66-dc95-6fb7711f3cd3@gentoo.org
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH v3 0/2] Add esed.eclass for modifying with checks for no-op by Ionen Wolkens
1 FWIW: In an idealistic, but naive attempt, I've submitted a patch to
2 upstream sed that adds an --error-if-unmodifed option [1]. Fellow Gentoo
3 developers where quick to point out in #gentoo-dev that this patch
4 barley scratches the surface of the sphere where sed could mutate state.
5 It appears that --error-if-unmodifed in sed can only be reliable
6 implemented if --inplace is used, by basically mimicking what Ionen's
7 esed class does/did.
8
9 This made me wonder if fixing this in sed is really the ideal solution.
10 However, Ionen also closed the PR due to "having seconds thoughts" [2].
11
12 I guess this leaves us with qa-sed from app-portage/iwdevtools. Which is
13 probably not the worst outcome.
14
15 - Flow
16
17 1: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/sed-devel/2022-07/msg00001.html
18 2: https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/25662#issuecomment-1165265901