| 1 |
On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 18:22:24 +0200 |
| 2 |
Jakub Moc <jakub@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> Ciaran McCreesh napsal(a): |
| 4 |
> > What? No it wouldn't. It would ensure that bugs were caught during |
| 5 |
> > the src_install phase rather than after a package has been |
| 6 |
> > installed. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> What kind of bugs exactly? The ones *created* by this behavior change? |
| 9 |
> I'd rather not create such bugs for starters, because it's plain |
| 10 |
> pointless. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
You're missing the point. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
As of a year or so ago, dosym will succeed even if the dosym target |
| 15 |
directory doesn't exist, and even if it means creating arbitrary |
| 16 |
directories. Some other utilities, such as dohard for example, will |
| 17 |
fail under otherwise identical circumstances. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
There is nothing in dosym's name that suggests that it will create a |
| 20 |
directory as well as a symlink -- it is not like, for example, dobin or |
| 21 |
dosbin in this respect, both of which clearly are allowed to create a |
| 22 |
well defined, non-variable path. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
If anyone really *is* relying upon dosym to create a directory, rather |
| 25 |
than having it happen by accident, adding in a dodir beforehand when |
| 26 |
switching EAPIs is easy, and will prevent accidental directory creation. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
> If the Makefiles suck, file bugs upstream instead of dumping the stuff |
| 29 |
> on Gentoo users. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
It's not the users that will see this. It's developers. The only time |
| 32 |
it will fail for users and not developers is when something's broken |
| 33 |
anyway, and that's far better than ending up with a broken install. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
Archives