| 1 |
On Saturday 06 September 2014 16:22:46 hasufell wrote: |
| 2 |
> Anthony G. Basile: |
| 3 |
> > On 09/06/14 12:12, hasufell wrote: |
| 4 |
> >> Anthony G. Basile: |
| 5 |
> >>>> And when you do ask, is a package that's "provided" installed, and if |
| 6 |
> >>>> so, what's its metadata? |
| 7 |
> >>> |
| 8 |
> >>> When the package is installed, that data should have been cached. |
| 9 |
> >> |
| 10 |
> >> Afaik there is nothing "cached" if you put stuff in package.provided. |
| 11 |
> >> It's a terrible hack, unless I missed something. |
| 12 |
> > |
| 13 |
> > I wasn't sure what Ciaran was talking about there. If its hacky, then |
| 14 |
> > we certainly don't want to standardize it in the GLEP. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> Well, you have to to define what tools can expect from |
| 17 |
> provided/installed packages. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> That means either say "you cannot expect anything, because there might |
| 20 |
> or might not be metadata" or say "you can expect metadata for any |
| 21 |
> provided/installed package" in which case package.provided feature has |
| 22 |
> to be removed from portage. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
"Provided" means "not managed by the package manager" and thus returning |
| 25 |
"empty metadata" for queries is perfectly fine. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
I don't see why this feature would need to be removed ... |
Archives