| 1 |
Dnia 2013-06-15, o godz. 18:25:15 |
| 2 |
Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> napisał(a): |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> >>>>> On Sat, 15 Jun 2013, hasufell wrote: |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> >> PMS doesn't guarantee that die works correctly in a subshell: |
| 7 |
> >> http://dev.gentoo.org/~ulm/pms/5/pms.html#x1-12800011.3.3 |
| 8 |
> >> |
| 9 |
> >> So the devmanual agrees with the spec, and the eclasses need to be |
| 10 |
> >> fixed. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> > How does that make any sense? |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> It makes perfect sense. The specification doesn't require that the |
| 15 |
> package manager's die function works in a subshell, so ebuilds and |
| 16 |
> eclasses cannot rely on such behaviour. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> If you want a different behaviour for future EAPIs, then PMS needs to |
| 19 |
> be changed. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
And there's a bug open for it already: |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=465008 |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
Best regards, |
| 27 |
Michał Górny |
Archives