| 1 |
On 1/24/2013 12:18, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 24/01/13 01:09 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 12:49 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net> |
| 4 |
>> wrote: |
| 5 |
>>> That said, presumably udisks would choose not to make its check |
| 6 |
>>> fatal, altho changing the default to fatal could complicate |
| 7 |
>>> things for existing ebuilds until they're fixed. |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
>> That was basically my whole point - it can't be one-size-fits-all. |
| 10 |
>> Honestly, based on some of the other feedback I'm not convinced it |
| 11 |
>> should ever be fatal. Perhaps it should be more or less noisy. |
| 12 |
>> |
| 13 |
>> Keep in mind that a typical user may be running parallel builds |
| 14 |
>> and such - so a delay doesn't really make much sense there either. |
| 15 |
>> There should also be some way to kill any interactivity in advance |
| 16 |
>> - if I'm running a bootstrap script of some kind and I'm |
| 17 |
>> installing/updating udev before I even compile a kernel that |
| 18 |
>> shouldn't cause the whole process to die. |
| 19 |
>> |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> a fatal die in pkg_pretend could be circumvented by an environment |
| 22 |
> variable such as ${PN}_I_KNOW_WHAT_IM_DOING being set. Just a thought. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
People keep quoting, on this list and on gentoo-user, that Gentoo is not |
| 25 |
a "hand holding" distribution. Having to set I_KNOW_WHAT_IM_DOING=1 sure |
| 26 |
seems to me like I'm telling my dad I don't need him to hold my hand to |
| 27 |
cross the street anymore, I'm a big boy. It seems like an added step |
| 28 |
that isn't necessary. If users are not reading the messages they're |
| 29 |
receiving and it breaks their systems, why should that make extra work |
| 30 |
for those of us who do pay attention? |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
♫Dustin |
Archives