Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Steev Klimaszewski <steev@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Possibility of overriding user defined INSTALL_MASK from an ebuild?
Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2014 03:47:08
Message-Id: 1393645604.10542.14.camel@oswin.hackershack.net
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Possibility of overriding user defined INSTALL_MASK from an ebuild? by Samuli Suominen
1 On Fri, 2014-02-28 at 19:18 +0200, Samuli Suominen wrote:
2 > On 28/02/14 19:01, Lars Wendler wrote:
3 > > On Fri, 28 Feb 2014 16:41:23 +0200 Samuli Suominen wrote:
4 > >
5 > >> On 28/02/14 16:41, Lars Wendler wrote:
6 > >>> On Fri, 28 Feb 2014 15:28:30 +0200 Samuli Suominen wrote:
7 > >>>
8 > >>>> It would be very helpful if INSTALL_MASK could be overriden from an
9 > >>>> ebuild, if user hasn't
10 > >>>> set otherwise.
11 > >>>> So it could be configured like USE_ORDER which is
12 > >>>> "env:pkg:conf:defaults:pkginternal:repo:env.d"
13 > >>>> So INSTALL_MASK_ORDER like "ebuild:${user's own INSTALL_MASK}"
14 > >>>> This would be very helpful in preventing people from shooting
15 > >>>> themself in the foot
16 > >>>>
17 > >>>> The only problem is that I propably don't have enough python skills
18 > >>>> to make that happen w/
19 > >>>> sys-apps/portage. But does the suggestion make sense? Should I open
20 > >>>> a feature request bug?
21 > >>>>
22 > >>> No need for if the ebuild(s) would use sane installation paths.
23 > >>>
24 > >>> Please finally stop imposing your insane ideas upon us, thanks.
25 > >>>
26 > >> You should stop attacking people. Period.
27 > > Once you stop trying to make things worse in Gentoo I will consider
28 > > stopping my attacks... so it's up to you.
29 > >
30 >
31 > Is there anything you'd like to add before I open the comrel bug about
32 > baseless accusation of making things intentionally worse?
33 >
34 > - Samuli
35 >
36
37 I would like to add something - you had absolutely no problem attacking
38 him for putting in the work of splitting udev out to like it used to be,
39 but the second he says something even remotely "inciteful" (as an
40 innocent bystander, I didn't even understand why you felt attacked) - so
41 while you're opening one on him, please open one on yourself.